Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Sukhsen Kori
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
Misc. Criminal Case No.9507/2013 24.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, Government Advocate for the applicant-State. Heard on admission. This is an application for grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code. for short).By the impugned judgment, respondent has been acquitted of the offence under Sections 376(1) and 450 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC.).The impugned judgment dated 4/5/2013 was passed by Additional Sessions Judge, designated as Special Judge, Sidhi. As per the prosecution story, on 29/8/12, while prosecutrix was feeding her cattle and had gone inside her house to bring a sickle, respondent also entered inside the house and subjected the prosecutrix to rape. Prosecutrix apprised her husband and father- in-law of the incident, but, out of social embarrassment, did not initially go to lodge report. Thereafter, on 2/9/12 she lodged FiRs.Information Report at Police Station Majholi. After completion of the investig...
Abdul Wahid Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
W.P.No.9718 o1. Abdul Wahid vs State of Madhya Pradesh 24/07/2013 Shri Ahadulla Usmani, Learned Advocate for the petitioner. Shri R.D.Jain, Learned Advocate General and Shri P.K.Kaurav, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State. It is submitted by the petitioner that a return has been filed in the matter on 23rd of July, 2013, in which, it is stated that election process for composition of State Wakf Board has already been commenced from 17th of July, 2013, so this petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent to complete the aforesaid process in a time frame. In reply, it is submitted by learned Advocate General that vide Annexure R/1, a notification has been issued for the election of Madhya Pradesh Wakf Board and a Returning Officer has been appointed. As per Annexure R/2, an Election Board is to be constituted, which may take little time. It is submitted by Shri Kaurav that the entire process shall be expedite and the election shall be held as ea...
Ramesh Bajpai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
Cr.A.No.2604/2012 24.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Amit Dubey, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Ankur Shrivastava, Advocate for the complainant. Shri Aditya Adhikari, Standing Counsel for respondent- Special Police Establishment, Lokayukt Office. Heard on I.A.6904/13, which is an application under Section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for returning the sum of Rs.20,000/- to complainant Sanjay Patil, seized from the appellant. The prayer has been opposed by the learned Standing Counsel on the ground that the said amount, seized from the accused was given by the complainant is an important piece of evidence. According to the learned Standing Counsel, in case the matter is remanded, original seized notes would be required for adjudication. Having regards to the arguments advanced by the parties, we have gone through the record. Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In paragra...
Rena JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
W.P.No.11882 / 2013 (Rena Jain..Vs..State of MP & otheRs.24-07-2013 Shri Narendra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Chaudhary, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that the petitioner is not being permitted to participate in the counselling being conducted for making appointments on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak, Grade-III though the petitioner is over qualified having obtained a B.Ed. degree. Similar petitions wherein the petitioners have raised the same issue, have been dismissed by this Court in the cases of Sanyogita Thakur and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.reported in 2013 (2) MPLJ 20 and W.P.No.6129/2013 (S).decided on 15-4-2013 and in the circumstances this petition being identical, the same is also dismissed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the case of Sanyogita Thakur (supra) this Court has made certain...
Dinesh Kumar Kaurav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
W.P.No.13658/2012 (D.K.Kaurav versus State of MP and otheRs.24.07.2013 Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the revisional authority in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case the petitioner does so within 15 days from today along with a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the same on merits and shall not dismiss the same only on the ground of limitation. With the aforesaid liberty/observations, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of as withdrawn. (R.S.Jha) Judge msp...
Pawan Sachan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
M.Cr.C.No.6672/2013 24.07.2013 Shri Paritosh Trivedi, Advocate for the applicant. Dr. Anjali Gyanani, Panel Lawyer for the State. Heard. Petitioner has filed this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C.for quashing the FiRs.Information Report registered as Crime No.97/13 by police station Maharajpur district Mandla and the consequent investigation. In short, the facts of the case are that two persons namely Jivanlal Sahu and Kamesh were apprehended by police with 51 litres and 840 ml. country made liquor without permit and a case under section 34(2) of M.P.Excise Act read with section 120-B of I.P.C.was registered. At the time of arrest, these two accused persons informed that this liquor was delivered to them by contractor Pawan Sachan for sale on the basis of commission. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the couRs.of investigation, it was revealed that Pawan Sachan was not a contractor of liquor and that he was falsely roped in because he had been granted a contract ...
Dhanraj Singh Pusam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.15/2011 Dhanraj Singh Pusam. -Versus- State of M.P.and otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi. Shri Ajay S. Raizada , learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents No.1,3,4 and 6. Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned Senior counsel assisted by Shri Sanjay Ram Tamrakar, for the respondent No.5. ORDER (24.07.2013) 1: This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is said to have been filed for grant of a writ of quo warranto directing removal of respondent No.5 from the post on various allegations. It is contended by the petitioner that he is a social worker and a member of Gondwana Gantantra Party and an office bearer of the said party being Media Incharge. The respondent No.5 was born at Gwalior, has obtained his education without claiming any benefit of reservation, took part in the selection for appointment on the post of Assistant Engineer, ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Manoj Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
Misc. Criminal Case No.9506/2013 24.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, Government Advocate for the applicant-State. Heard on admission. This is an application for grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code. for short).By the impugned judgment, respondent no.1 has been acquitted of the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(1) and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC.).respondent no.2 of the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC and respondent no.3 of the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 read with 109 of the IPC. The impugned judgment dated 27/4/2013 was passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, in Sessions Trial No.319/11. As per the prosecution story, on 3/6/11, at about 2 p.m., a missing report no.9/11 was lodged by Ramadhar Patel in respect of his daughter viz. the prosecutrix, aged about 15 yeaRs.During investigation into Crime No.150/11 so registered, it surfaced that Manot with the assistance of h...
Smt. Seema Rajput Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
W.P.No.12480/2013 (Smt. Seema Rajput and another versus State of MP and otheRs.24.07.2013 Heard Shri V.D.S.Choudhan, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioners have filed this petition alleging that they possess all the necessary and requisite qualifications as prescribed by the advertisement and the rules and have qualified in the eligibility examination for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III but they have not been called for counselling. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the act of the respondents is illegal as the petitioners are fully qualified and are entitled to be called for counselling. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and in view of the order passed by this court in W.P.No.17684/12 on 13.06.2013, keeping the concept of parity in mind, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioners file the representations...
Shabnam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2013
W.P.No.12533/2013 24/7/2013 Shri Dharmendra Soni, Adv.for the petitioner. Smt. Sheetal Dubey, P.L.for the respondent no.1/State. Shri Mahendra Pateria with Shri Brajesh Dubey, Advocates for the respondent no.2. None for respondent no.3. Challenging the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to appear in Diploma in Education, Second Year Main Ex- amination which was conducted for the academic session 2012-2013 from 9.7.2013, this writ petition was filed. The case of the petitioner is that he has pursued the couRs.in question from the Institute of respondent no.3. As per the requirement prescribed by respondent no.2 for appearing in the aforesaid examina- tion, the examination forms were to be filled online. The procedure was prescribed for filling the examination forms online and the sched- ule of examinations was notified. According to the petitioner, the rules for submission of form contemplated that for submission of the forms online is to be done in continuation ...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »