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.
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Anil Tanwar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
M.Cr.C.No.6034/2012. 27.8.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the applicant- State. This application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code.) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 30/11/2011 passed by the XIV Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in Sessions Trial No.52/2008, whereby respondent no.5 Ajay Tripathi has been acquitted of the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for short (the IPC.) and the remaining respondents have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 323 of the IPC, but all the respondents have been convicted under Sections 147 and 323/149 of the IPC. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04/03/2007 at about 8.30 PM, respondents constituted an un-lawful assembly near Shivji Temple at National Highway Masrod and in furtherance of their common object, assaulted complainant Chetan and respondent no.5 also attempted t...
Sunil Prajapati Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
W.P.No.13758/2013 Sunil Prajapati vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 27.08.2013 Heard Shri Nityanand Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondents have cancelled the selection of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (LDC) on the ground that on verification it was found that the computer certificate possessed by the petitioner is not in accordance with the prescribed standard. It is, however, observed that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without approaching the authorities or bringing to their notice the orders of this Court or the directions issued by the Government of India and the circular Annexure-8 and other documents in respect of the validity of the certificate possessed by the petitioner. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that the matter requires to be looked into by the authority concerned...
Usha Kevat Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
Cr.A.No.2126/2013 27.8.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri N.K.Mishra, Advocate for the appellant. 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 26.6.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Anuppur, in Sessions Trial No.24/2009, whereby respondent no.2 has been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that upon a false promise of marriage, since 5/4/2007 respondent no.2 persistently subjected the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse, and when he turned her out from his house, report of the incident was lodged by her at Police Station Anupppur on 24/9/2008, on which Crime was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet was filed. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and the impugned judgmen...
Shishir Kumar Sinha Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR M.Cr.C. No.7678/2003 Shishir Kumar Sinha..Petitoiner Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation through SP, Jabalpur....Respondent For the petitioner : Shri Ajay Mishra, Senior Advocate with Shri Gaurav Tiwari, Advocate For the respondent : Shri Vikram Singh, Standing Counsel. ****** Present: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE B. D. RATHI ****** ORDER (27.8.2013) The following order of the Court was delivered by : B. D. Rathi, J.This petition has been preferred, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code.), challenging the order dated 29.5.2013 passed by the Special Judge (for CBI cases), Jabalpur in Special Case No.01/2013, whereby the application filed by the petitioner, under Section 91 of the Code, was rejected.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 25/11/2012 complainant Kaustubh Verma, Proprietor of Skolars. Coaching Classes, 428, New Adarsh Nagar, Jabalpur, lodged a written complaint against t...
S.S.Shanti Kumar and ors Vs. the State of M.P. and ors
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
M.C.C.No ::910. / 2004 S.S.Shanti Kumar and others versus State of MP and others 27.08.2013. None appears for the applicants. Shri K.S.Wadhwa, Additional Advocate General, appears for the respondents. This application has been for recalling an order-dated 28.1.2002, passed by a Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.2261/1998 (Smt. Vijaya Rani and others versus State of MP and others).The dispute which was canvassed by the petitioners in Writ Petition No.2261/1998 pertained to declaring certain land held by the petitioners as surplus land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as Act) and disposal of the writ petition by a Bench of this Court vide order- dated 28.1.2002. We have gone through the application filed by the applicants for recall and we find that after giving details of the proceedings held and the rights of the parties with regard to the land in question, the submission made in paragraph 36 is that this Court while deciding Writ P...
Dharmendra Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
1 W.P. No.3766/2007 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA Writ Petition No.3766 / 2007 PETITIONER : Shri Dharemendra Kumar Singh, S/o. Shri K.P. Singh, R/o. 249, W.N.Type Khamariya, District Jabalpur (M.P.) Versus RESPONDENTS:1. State of M.p. through its Secretary, Excise Department, Vallabh Bhawan Bhopal 2. Excise Commissioner, Office Gwalior 3. Collector, Office of Collector, Jabalpur 4. Assistant Excise Commissioner Office of Collectorate, Jabalpur 5. District Excise Officer, Office of Collectorate, Jabalpur (M.P.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petitioner by Shri P.S. Tomar, Advocate. Respondents by Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Government Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (27.08.2013) By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is claiming the following relie...
Vrindavan Vs. Chandra Shekhar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
M.Cr.C.No.7927/2012 27.08.2013 Shri A.K.Tiwari, Advocate for the applicants. Shri D.P.Patel, Advocate for the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the parties finally. By the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.applicants have challenged the order dated 8.5.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amarpatan District Satna in Criminal Revision No.73/2011 and the order dated 11.1.2011 passed by the learned JMFC, Amarpatan (Smt. Kiran Singh) in complaint case No.5/2011, whereby the complaint under Section 420 of IPC was registered against the applicant. The prosecution case, in short, is that the respondent has lodged a criminal complaint against the applicant that he purchased a land bearing Survey No.518 at village Kakara having area 0.70 hectare. The applicant Vrindavan purchased a stamp No.3858 from one Anurag Tripathi in the name of Vimalbhan Nai and a fake agreement was prepared with mentioning a fake date i.e.31.3.2004 and that agreement of sale was prepa...
Omprakash Lilhare Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
W.P.No.13789/2013 (Omprakash Lilhare ..versus State of MP & otheRs.27-08-2013 Shri Ghanshyam Burman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who is a holder of B.Ed. Degree and had participated in the selection process for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III, has filed this petition stating that he has not been permitted to participate in the process of selection. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after a perusal of the petition, it is observed on a statement to that effect being made by the learned counsel for the State, that similar petitions, wherein the petitioners had raised the same issue, have been dismissed by this Court with observations in the case of Sanyogita Thakur and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.reported in 2013 (2) MPLJ 206 and without any observations in the case of Jai Prakash Narayan Dwivedi versus ...
Sardar Ram Singh Vs. Devendra Nath
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Second Appeal No.150/2012 Sardar Ram Singh Vs. Devendra Nath and others --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Imtiaz Husain, counsel for the appellants. Shri J.Prasad, counsel for the respondents No.1 to 5. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on 27th day of August, 2013) The Civil Judge Class-I vide judgment and decree dated 21.10.2005 passed in Civil Suit No.8-A/1989 decreed the suit for eviction against the appellant and directed him to provide the vacant possession of the suit accommodation to the respondents. In Civil Appeal No.13-A/2009 preferred by the appellant was also dismissed vide judgment and decree date...
Mangleshwar Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
Mangleshwar Mishra versus State of M.P.Review Petition No ::752. 27. 08.2013. Shri Dharmesh Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri K.S.Wadhwa, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent Nos.1 to 4. None appears for respondent No.9, even though served, represented by counsel and reply filed. Seeking review/recall of an order dated 26.10.2010 passed in W.P.No.133/2010(s).this application has been filed for review. Applicant herein, Shri Mangleshwar Mishra was respondent No.7 in W.P.No.133/2010(s).In the said writ petition dispute was with regard to appointment of Panchayat Karmi/Panchayat Secretary to the Panchayat in question namely Gram Panchayat Sohagpur, in Janpad Panchayat Sohagpur, Tehsil Sohagpur, District Shahdol. It seems that with regard to appointment of Panchayat Karmi/Panchayat Secretary certain dispute was raised by the original petitioner Shri Sitaram Napit before the S.D.O.The S.D.O.passed an order on 8.11.2007 and interfered into the process of selec...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »