Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Smt. Parbati Chakravorti Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
WRIT PETITION No.14480/20126. 08.2013 Shri Ghanshyam Barman, learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court in bunch of cases has rendered a decision mainly in W.P.No.18771/2011, M.P.Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh versus State of M.P.and another, decided on 29.01.2013. The aforesaid writ petition has been disposed of in the following manner :- In view of above the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to abide by decision taken on 16.09.2009, 22.07.2011, 19.07.2012, 22.10.2012 in letter and spirit, any deviation therefrom, subject to any order being passed in W.A.No.597/2011 or the Supreme Court in the pending Special Leave Petition, will be seriously viewed. The cost which has been imposed while rejecting the application seeking modification be deposited with the High Court Legal Aid for the Poor within 30 days. Since the controveRs.involved in the present petition is already covered by a decision rendered by this Court in the case of M.P.Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh (supra).t...
Shashi Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
WRIT PETITION No.14517/20126. 08.2013 Shri Subhash Patel, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondents-State on advance copy. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that in terms of the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998, the petitioner would be entitled to grant of regular pay scale of the post of Shiksha Karmi. However, such a claim is not being considered, therefore, this writ petition is required to be filed. It is contended that identical claim was made before the Indore Bench of this Court in W.P.No.602/2010 (S) by certain teachers of the similar category namely Mohanlal & others and the said writ petition has been disposed of vide order dated 22.01.2010 directing consideration of the claim of the persons like petitioner. It is, thus, contended that similar treatment may be given to the petitioner. This Court in the case of Mohanlal (su...
Ramdeen Vs. Anil
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
Cr.A.No.1189/2011 23.8.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri A.K.Tiwari, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the respondent no.2-State. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code.) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 22/01/2011 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Harda in Special Session Case No.25/2009, whereby respondent No.1 has been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short) and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (for short the Act.) but convicted him under Section 326 of IPC. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11/12/2008 at about 3.30, the complainant received a telephonic message that his cousin Mithun @ Ramjeevan was lying at the culvert near Sukhni river in a serious condition. When he reached there he saw that an Axe blow had been inflicted on his face . F...
Alok Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
W.P.No.14265/2013 Alok Verma vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 23.08.2013 Heard Shri M.L.Jaiswal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri K.K.Gautam for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who is working on the post of Tehsildar, has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 7.8.2013 by which he has been transferred from Chhatarpur to Ashok Nagar. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has previously been transferred from Panna to Chhatarpur and not he has again been transferred from Chhatarpur to Ashok Nagar and, therefore, the impugned transfer order is contrary to the directions issued by the Election Commissioner itself. It is also submitted that the petitioner has small children who are studying in Class III & VI and has been transferred in the mid session. It is submitted that the impugned order is also contrary to the transfer policy. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Chaudhary versus ...
Dinesh Shridhar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
Cr.A.No.2466/2010 23.8.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Ku. Premlata Lokhande, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the respondent no.1-State. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code.) being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30/04/2010 passed by Special Judge (under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the Act.).at Jabalpur in S.T.No.211/2009, whereby respondent No.2 has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 376 & 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that during the period 15/06/2004 to 20/06/2008 the accused subjected the prosecutrix to sexual assault with assurance to marry her. On denial to marry, the prosecutrix committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. Crime was registered against the respondent No.2 for the offence punishable under sections ...
Smt.Mamta Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.11941/2012 Smt. Mamta Sharma versus State of Madhya Pradesh and otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi. Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents No.1,2 and 3. Shri Ghahshyam Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.4. ORDER ( .08.2013) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 12.07.2012, by which the petitioner, a widow of one Shri Ganesh Prasad Sharma, an Assistant Teacher who has died on 28.05.2012, has been asked to furnish a succession certificate for the purposes of grant of terminal dues of the said employee, on the ground that the petitioner was duly nominated as wife for the purposes of payment of all such claims of the said employee. This nomination was never cancelled or recalled, even modified. This being so, only the petitioner was entitled to receive the terminal ben...
Smt. N. Nelson Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
WRIT PETITION No.14398/20123. 08.2013 Shri N.K.Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondents-State. Heard on the question of admission. It is pointed out that in similar circumstances while disposing of the writ petition being W.P.No.1275/2013, Rajesh Kumar Lilhare & others versus The State of Madhya Pradesh & otheRs.on 04.02.2013, this Court has recorded the fact relating to the order passed in a review petition. Aforesaid writ petition was disposed of in the following manner recording such facts : It is not disputed at Bar that the claim as is being put-forth by the petitioners is covered by decision rendered in Review Petition No.243/2009, Shyam Narayan Giri and others versus Shri I.S.Dani and otheRs.decided on 14.10.2011. The said review petition was decided on the anvil of order dated 22.7.2011 issued by the State Government in the following terms : In view of the aforesaid, all the matters are disposed of finally. (i) All...
Balendra Singh Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
Cr.A.No.733/2011 23.8.2013 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri R.L.Shukla, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the respondent no.1-State. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code.) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 9.2.2011 passed by Session Judge, Rewa in Sessions Trial No.326/2010, whereby respondent no.2, Udayraj Singh has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 506 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that on basis of report of prosecutrix, she was medically examined and impregnation was found. Statements of witnesses were recorded and X-ray of prosecutrix was done. After arresting the accused/respondent no.2, he was also medically examined. Because of commission of rape with the prosecutrix by respondent no.2, she had become pregnant and a child was born who died after 22 days. Learned co...
Rajendra Prasad Vishwakarma Vs. Jitendra Kumar Dwivedi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
Criminal Appeal No.1307/2012 23.8.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.P.Tripathi, Advocate for the appellant. Heard on I.A.No.12705/2012, which is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Considering the reasons assigned therein, the I.A.is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is, hereby, condoned. This appeal has been filed by the appellant for enhancement of sentence passed in the impugned judgment. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that his appeal is not maintainable because it is filed for enhancement of sentence and it should be treated as criminal revision. Though the application for conversion of criminal appeal into criminal revision has not been filed but on oral prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant, the same is treated as criminal revision and it is directed that the appeal be registered as criminal revision. Heard on admission. This revision petition has been preferred, for enhancement of jail sentence of 7 years ...
Sandeep Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2013
1 W.P. No.4547/2012 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA Writ Petition No.4547 / 2012 PETITIONER : Sandeep Kumar Singh, S/o. Shri Surendra Singh R/o. Village Kanti, Tehsil Badwara, District Katni (M.P.) Versus RESPONDENTS:1. State of M.P. Through its Secretary, Department of Mining & Mineral Resources, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, District Bhopal 2. The Collector Katni, District Katni (M.P.) 3. The Commissioner, Jabalpur Division District Jabalpur (M.P.) 4. Shiva Corporation India Ltd. Registered as company with The regd office at 312, Ganpati Plaza, M.I. Road, District Jaipur (Raj.) Through its Manager, Kailashchand Gupta, S/o. Shri Murarilal Gupta R/o. Old Truck Union, Karouli (Raj.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petitioner by Shri Rohit Arya, Senior Advocate with Shri Shobhitaditya, Advocate. 2 W.P. No.4547/2012 Respondent no.1 to 3 by Shri S.S. Bisen, Govern...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »