Madhya Pradesh Court April 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sourabh Malik Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3544/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Sandesh Dixit, counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the State. Shri B.J.Chourasiya, counsel for the objector. Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 24.10.2012 in connection with Crime No.271/2012 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Jabalpur for offence punishable under Sections 302, 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. As per prosecution, nothing is alleged against the applicant in regard to assault. Assault is made by co-accused Lakhan to deceased Bachcha @ Pradeep. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that similarly placed co-accused Hemant Yadav has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.3.2013 passed in M.Cr.C.No.2417/2013. Case of this applicant is similar to the case of co-accused and trial would take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, prays ...
Suresh Singh Vs. Director Personnel Wcl Hq Coal Estate
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
W.P.No.11906/2009 02.04.2013 Shri Deepak Okhade, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for respondents. It is the case of the petitioner that he has obtained education upto the Higher Secondary pursuance to which the competent authority has issued a certificate as contained in Annx.P/12. In the said certificate the date of birth of the petitioner is correctly recorded. However, such a certificate is disputed by learned counsel for respondents stating that the said certificate has been issued for some 'Adhikari Pariksha (Class-X) of the year 1970 saying it to be equivalent examination to High School Examination conducted by Secondary Education Council of Uttar Pradesh. However, there is nothing on record to show that such an examination in which the petitioner has taken part was ever recognized as qualifying examination equivalent to the Matriculation by the Government of Uttar Pradesh or the State Government. The matter was once remanded to the respondent...
Pooran Mehra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3892/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Narendra Nikhare, Advocate for the applicants. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicants are in custody since 6.1.2013 in connection with Crime No./POR No.18953/09 registered by Forest Range Officer, Jaitpur, District Shahdol for the offences punishable under Sections 5, 9, 39, 50, 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. All the offences are triable by the Magistrate. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, they be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overa...
Santosh Kumar Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3931/2013 2.4.2013 Dr. Anuvad Shrivastava, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.7197/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.82/2012 registered at P.S.Khamaria, District Jabalpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC. As per prosecution, it is alleged against the applicant that he was involved in the conspiracy with Naveen Chhabra and without verifying the material fact, granted loan of Rs.3 lakhs to him despite the fact that the property was mortgaged with another bank. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. At the relevant time in the year 2005, he was posted at Khamaria Branch of Bank of India. The applicant acted upon the report of Advocate of the Bank. He was not aware of the fact that the property ...
Ghanshyam Prasad Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
Writ Petition No ::17254. / 2010 Ghanshyam Prasad Patel versus State of MP and others 01.04.2013. Shri Shreyas Pandit for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioners land was acquired, but no compensation was given. Interalia contending that compensation for acquisition of the land as detailed in the petition be granted, this writ petition is filed. In response to the notices issued, respondents have filed a reply and from paragraphs 5 to 7, respondents admit that due to some error in the Bandobast and partition ordered in the revenue records, compensation has been wrongly paid to some other person and it has not been paid to the petitioner. In paragraphs 5 to 7, the following averments are made by the respondents: 5. The answering respondents most respectfully submit that on 26.3.2009 (Annexure P/4) the aforesaid mistake in the Bandobast is directed to be rectified and it was directed that instead of line, a dotted line signifying only the presen...
Firoza Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.199/2013 Firoza Bi VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Y.K.Gupta, Advocate for the applicant. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 1st day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under sections 420, 468, 471, 474 of IPC vide judgment dated 1.12.2010 passed by the JMFC, Bhopal, (Smt.Surekha Mishra) in criminal case No.6/2012 and sentenced for 1 year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.100/- for each count of offence. In criminal appeal No.637/2011, the learned Tenth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal vide judgment dated 29.1.2013 dismissed the appeal in toto. Being aggrieved with the judgments passed by both the Courts below, the applicant has prefe...
Nagendra Singh @ Bablu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.550/2010 Nagendra Singh @ Bablu VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sushri Manju Verma, Advocate appointed from the panel of legal services authority for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 2nd day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 39 of the Electricity Act vide judgment dated 7.12.2006 passed by the JMFC, Teothar, District Rewa (Shri C.M.Upadhyay) in criminal case No.1463/1998 and sentenced for 1 year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-. In criminal appeal No.5/2007, the learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa vide judgment dated 21.5.2008 dismissed the appeal in toto. Being aggrieved with the judg...
Bhabhut @ Nand Kishre Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2445/2013 1.4.2013 Shri Pushpendra Dubey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 22.10.2012 in connection with Crime No.173/2012 registered at P.S.Bijadehi, District Betul for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of 6 months belated FIR. As per prosecution, the prosecutrix is a deaf and dumb lady. It is alleged against the applicant that he had committed intercouRs.with the prosecutrix more than one time and she got pregnant. However, during the investigation, DNA tests of newly born baby, prosecutrix, applicant and co-accused Bablu were conducted. The applicant has not been found to be the biological father of ...
Smt. Kaliya Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3898/2013 1.4.2013 Shri Z.M.Shah, Advocate for the applicants. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.7164/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants. The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.71/2013 registered at P.S.Bareli, District Raisen for the offences punishable under Sections 306/34 of the IPC. As per prosecution, it is alleged against the applicants that they used to commit cruelty on the deceased in regard to payment of loan taken by the deceased from a private company. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are ladies, they have been falsely implicated in the case. Applicant No.1 is mother-in-law and applicant No.2 is sister-in-law (Jethani) of deceased Sania Bai. Nothing is required to be seized from their possession. They are ready to co-operate in the investigation and trial. The applicants are reputed citizen of the locality, in the ...
Krishna Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2013
W.P.No.5170/2013 02/04/2013 Shri S.D.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate on advance notice for the respondents/State. Respondent No.3, the Mining Officer, Rewa is directed to remain personally present before this Court on 9th of April, 2013 along with original records pertaining to passing of the impugned order Annexure-P6 dated 11.2.2013. The said respondent shall keep present before this Court the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, the manner in which the show cause notice is issued, the enquiry conducted and the material to show that the enquiry is conducted in the presence of the petitioner after giving him due opportunity of hearing. The Mining Officer shall remain present before this Court on 9th of April, 2013 showing the aforesaid, failing which, this Court shall be constrained to proceed against the said officer for mentioning wrong facts in the impugned order without issuing notice to the petitioner and without ...
- ‹ Prev
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- Next ›
- Last »