Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Shrawan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P.No.15586/2013 25.09.2013 Shri Rajneesh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Government Advocate on advance notice. PetitioneRs.Gurujis appointed under the Education Guarantee Scheme respectively on 30.06.1997, 12.04.1999, 14.10.1999, 08.05.1999, 20.08.1997, 10.02.1999 & 13.03.1997 has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to consider them for grant of status as Siksha Karmi and absorption in the Assistant Teacher Cadre as per recommendation of D.P.Dubey Committee. Petitioner also places reliance on a decision by Division Bench of this Court at Gwalior in Gopal Chawla and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.W.A.No.596/2012, decided on 15.12.10 and the orders passed by Janpad Panchayat, Ashoknagar in pursuance thereof: In Gopal Chawla (Supra) it is observed by the Division Bench that: The only contention which has been put forth 2 by learned counsel for the appellants is that the present appellants who were the writ petit...
Rajni Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
M.Cr.C.No.738/2013 25.09.2013 Shri Mukesh Pandey, counsel for the applicants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Shri Dilip Pandey, counsel for the objector. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicants have moved the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.to quash the proceedings of Crime No.417/12 registered at Police Station Obedullaganj, District Raisen for the offences punishable under Sections 306/34 of IPC. The facts of the case, in short are that, there was an allegation against the applicants that they were taking the forcefully possession of one house. The house was locked and the deceased Phoolwati threatened them that, if forcefully possession was taken then, she would commit suicide. However, thereafter Phoolwati gave a suicidal note that she was set on fire by the applicants. Initially, a case for the offence punishable under Sections 302 & 307 of IPC was registered and thereafter, it was converted into the offence punishable und...
Vinod Kumar Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P.NO.10458/2013 25.09.2013 Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner, a resident of Village Lonaha, Tahsil Churhat, District Sidhi, has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition, challenging the correctness of appointment of respondent No.5. The petitioner has not claimed anything in the present writ petition for himself, but has claimed a direction against the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner and to cancel the appointment of respondent No.5. It is contended that the respondent No.5 was appointed on 26.9.2003 on muster roll as unskilled. The status of post or the nature of appointment of respondent No.5 is not disclosed. Only this much is said that the order in this respect was issued in which the name of the respondent No.5 was mentioned as unskilled labourer in terms of the order of t...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Smt. Rambai Kushbaha
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Misc. Criminal Case No.6906/2011 25.9.2013 Shri S.K.Kashyap, 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) against the acquittal of respondent Rambai Kushbaha for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC').The corresponding judgment was passed by Special Judge, Sidhi, in Sessions Trial No.190/2008 on 6.4.2011. Marriage of Anita (since deceased) was solemnized with son of the respondent within seven years of the date of incident. As per the prosecution story, respondent was involved in subjecting Anita to cruelty and harassment due to non satisfaction of demand for dowry and, ultimately, on 30.5.2008, under suspicious circumstances, dead body of Anita was found hanged in her matrimonial home. Learned Government Advocate submitted that the trial Court had erred in appreciating the evi...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Vijay Kumar Rajak
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Misc. Criminal Case No.4255/2011 25.9.2013 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) against the acquittal of respondents namely Vijay Kumar Rajak, Sanjay Kumar Rajak, Ramkrishna Rajak and Manish Rajak of the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420/34, 365/34, 311/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC').The corresponding judgment was passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kotama, District Anuppur in Sessions Trial No.191/2009 on 13.1.2011. Prosecution case, in brief, is that, during the period July 2005 to January 2006, in furtherance of their common intention, respondent no.1 Vijay not only took Jeevanlal, son of complainant Lagansaay Urav on the pretext of his education at Jabalpur and caused his disappearance, but also cheated the complainant by personating the other respondent over Telephone as C...
Tulsiram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P No.15815 of 2013 25.9.2013 Shri Ravindra Parashar, counsel for the petitioneRs.Smt Sheetal Dubey, GA for the respondent/State. The petitioners stating themselves to be the Kotwars of respective villages have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the appropriate writ for the following reliefs :- (a) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondents to decide the petitioners claim/ representations in the light of notifications dated 3/3/2010 (Anenx.P/3) as has been directed in order Annex.P-4 passed in W.P.No.939/09. (b) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be given to the petitioneRs.in the interest of justice. 2. In the couRs.of arguments on admission by referring the copy of IA No.13615/13 petitioners counsel said that he has filed this IA along with copy of the order dated 14.8.13 passed by Collector Narsingpur in Revenue Case No.107-B/121-12-13 whereby the application of some oth...
Suresh Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P No.16273 of 2013 25.9.2013 Shri Ravindra Parashar, counsel for the petitioneRs.Smt Sheetal Dubey, GA for the respondent/State. The petitioners stating themselves to be the Kotwars of respective villages have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the appropriate writ for the following reliefs :- (a) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondents to decide the petitioners claim/ representations in the light of notifications dated 3/3/2010 (Anenx.P/3) as has been directed in order Annex.P-4 passed in W.P.No.939/09. (b) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be given to the petitioneRs.in the interest of justice. 2. In the couRs.of arguments on admission by referring the copy of IA No.13619/13 petitioners counsel said that he has filed this IA along with copy of the order dated 14.8.13 passed by Collector Narsingpur in Revenue Case No.107-B/121-12-13 whereby the application of some oth...
Ram Prasad Mishra Vs. Sunil Kumar Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Writ Petition No.16364/13 25.09.2013 Ku. Shradha Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. She is heard on the question of admission. On behalf of the petitioner, this petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the order dated 25.7.2013 (Annexure-P-1) passed by IVth Civil Judge Class-II Sidhi, in Civil Suit No.143-A/12, whereby, allowing the application of the respondents/plaintiffs filed under Section 151 of CPC., the petitioner has been restrained to transfer, alienate or to create any third party interest with respect of the disputed land, till disposal of the suit. Petitioners counsel after taking me through the papers placed on the record along with the impugned order argued that the application for ad-interim injunction was filed on behalf of the respondent under Section 151 of CPC., and under such provision the trial Court did not have any authority to pass such an order. So on such count, the impugned order deserves to be quashed....
Vinod Karosiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Criminal Revision No.1425/2013 25/09/2013 Shri Hitendra Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the respondent/State. Heard finally. Applicant has filed this revision petition u/s 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the order dated 9/04/13 passed by Ivth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in S.T.No.44/13 whereby a charge u/s 306 of IPC has been framed against him. The facts, in short, giving rise to this petition are that deceased Suresh Sharma had issued a cheque of Rs.10,000/- in favour of the applicant which was dishonored on which applicant made the demand of money and threatened him to prosecute under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Due to said reason, deceased committed suicide by hanging himself. Initially on 29/08/11 a merg was registered at police station Kotwari, District Chhindwara thereafter FIR was registered on 23/10/2011. During the inquiry, statements of witnesses were recorded and matter was investigated....
Smt. Sharad Kumari JaIn Vs. Board of Revenue
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P.No.21465/2012. 25.9.2013. Shri Sunil Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Smt. Sheetal Dubey, learned G.A.for respondent No.1 to 4. None for respondent No.5 to 7 and 12 to 19. Shri Rakesh Jain, learned counsel for respondent No.8 to 11. Heard on IA No.13125/13, petitioneRs.application for taking annexed documents on record. The same appears to be relevant with the matter. Hence, by allowing the IA, same are taken on record. Also heard on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 30.11.2012 (Ann. P.7).passed by the respondent No.1/ Board of Revenue in Revenue Revision No.2980/2/2012, whereby dismissing the revision of the present petitioners the order dated 31.8.2011 passed by the Collector, District Sagar in Revenue Case No.9/A- 6(A)/2011-12, directing some correction and modification in the revenue record of survey number stated in the Annexure P-1, has been af...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »