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.
V.K. Dubey Vs. Shri Sanjay Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
CONC No.1987/2013 V. K. Dubey & Ano. vs. Shri Sanjay Singh & ANo.1 25.09.2013 Shri Vinod Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Division Bench of this Court in W.A No.597/2011 dated 20.8.2013 and modified by order dated 4.9.2013 has passed the following directions:- (a) The appellants are allowed to make payment of arrears which have fallen due to the respondent as per order dated 30.1.2013 passed by the State Government by which it was ordered by the School Education Department that all the respondents be paid arrears from 1.4.2000 to 9.12.2010 as per 5th Pay Commission but to the extent of 50% and the aforesaid payment shall be subject to the decision in the pending SLP and present writ appeal. (b) The instalments fallen due in 2012-13, i.e., two instalments, shall be paid by the appellants to all the teachers who have not been paid the arrears in compliance of the order ...
Anil Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
W.P.No.15735/2013(PIL) 25.09.2013 Shri Anil Lala, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Additional Advocate General for the State. This petition is directed against an order Annexure P-1 dated 03.06.2013, by which the respondent no.5 has been appointed as In-charge Managing Director of Madhya Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Maryadit (Apex Bank).Bhopal. This order has been assailed by the petitioner on the ground that as per Section 49-E of the M.P.Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 second proviso, the respondent No.5 could have been appointed by the Board of Directors of the Bank as per the guidelines issued by the Registrar and also in accordance with the criteria provided by the Reserve Bank and not by the State Government. He has referred the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India which are filed as Annexure P-3, in particular para 7.4(iv).Stating aforesaid, it is submitted that respondent No.5 is not entitled to work as the Incharge Managing Director of the Madhya Pradesh Stat...
Ramesh Kumar Gaur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
M.Cr.C.No.10140/2013 25.09.2013 Shri Dilip Pandey, counsel for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent Nos.1 to 3/State. Heard on admission. The applicant has moved the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.to seek the directions to the police that a case for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC may be filed before the Magisterial Court. The facts of the case, in short are that, one Phoolwati wife of the applicant expired on 22.8.2012 due to burn injuries. She gave a dying declaration that she was burnt by the respondent Nos.4 to 7. A case was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302 & 307 of IPC, but the police did not file the charge sheet for such offences. On the other hand, the charge sheet was filed for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, where learned Panel Lawyer has i...
Gotha Vs. Smt. Rajkumari
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
Writ Petition No.10346/2013 25.09.2013 Shri Pranay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. He apprises me that in pendency of this writ petition, he filed IA No.13406/13, (Gotha versus Smt. Raj Kumar and otheRs.in the Registry on dated 23.9.2013 alongwith some documents for taking the same on record. On asking the petitioner's counsel whether such documents were before the trial court at the time of passing the impugned order, on which he fairly submits that no such documents were produced by the petitioner before the trial court. He also said that his case for setting aside the impugned order dated 17.4.2013, (Ann. P-5) is substantially based on the proposed documents, (Ann. P-8) collectively, on which asking the petitioner's counsel that how these documents could be taken into consideration at this stage for the fiRs.time, when the same were not before the trial court, on which he prays to permit the petitioner to withdraw this petition with liberty to file an appropriate review p...
John Raphael Vs. Mr. M.A. Joy
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
M.Cr.C.No.15497/2012 25.09.2013 The applicant John Raphael is present in person. Shri J.K.Verma, counsel for the respondent Nos.1, 3 to 5. It is informed that the respondent No.2 has already been expired. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicant has challenged the order dated 26.8.2011 passed by the J.M.F.C.Sagar in Criminal Case No.2175/06, whereby the application under Section 229-A of Cr.P.C.was dismissed. Also the order dated 25.4.2012 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Criminal Revision No.114/12 is also challenged, whereby the revision against the order dated 26.8.2011 passed by the J.M.F.C.Sagar was dismissed. The facts of the case, in short are that, the applicant has moved a criminal complaint against the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC and the complaint is pending. The accused Nos.1 & 3 were not exempted from their attendance before the trial Court under Section 205 of Cr.P.C.The learned J.M.F.C.grante...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Keshav Pratap Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
M.Cr.C.No.10496/2011 25.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the applicant- State. Heard on admission. 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 30/3/2011 passed by I Additional Judge to the Court of I Additional Sessions Judge, Panna, in Sessions Trial No.180/2010, whereby respondent Keshavpratap Singh has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 417 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC) and respondent Neeraj Singh has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 506 Part II of the IPC. Prosecution case, in brief is that, prosecutrix was employed as a domestic help by respondent no.1 Keshav after the festival of Rakshabandhan in the year 2010. Fifteen to twenty days thereafter, Keshav committed rape upon her and as she tried to scream, he pressed hi...
Ram Prasad Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
1 W.P No.1361 of 2013 25.9.2013 Shri V.P.Singh, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Sharma, PL for respondents No.1 to 4. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner , father of deceased Asha Patel, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs :- (a) This Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding to the respondents to enquiry about the matter and to register offences against the culprits I.e private respondent No.5 to 9 who have caused death of the daughter of petitioner named Asha Patel by making cruelty for demand of dowry and consuming her poisonous thing. (b) Any other relief which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be allowed in favour of the petitioners.2. Petitioner's counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition argued that deceased Asha Patel was married with respondent No.5 Daduram Patel near about befo...
Ashadu Lal Sanodia Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
WRIT PETITION No.9312/2013 1 25.09.2013 Shri Rakesh Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State on advance copy. With the consent of learned counsel for parties heard finally. Stating that the petitioner No.1 and husband of petitioner No.2 are also similarly placed persons that of Dharam Pal Chaurasiya and otheRs.who have approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2858/2005 (S).which was disposed of finally vide order dated 23.11.2007 the petitioners are also entitled to be given the benefit of order passed by coordinate bench of this Court at Indore in W.P.No.6773/2006 (S) (Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Promod Koranne versus State of M.P.& otheRs.decided on 26.1.2007, the petitioners have prayed for similar directions. It is seen that the aforesaid writ petition was decided in the following manner: 17. Consequently these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramon...
Smt. Annpoorna Dubey Vs. Shri Sanjay Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
CONC No.1989/2013 Smt. Annpoorna Dubey vs. Shri Sanjay Singh & ANo.1 25.09.2013 Shri Vinod Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Division Bench of this Court in W.A No.597/2011 dated 20.8.2013 and modified by order dated 4.9.2013 has passed the following directions:- (a) The appellants are allowed to make payment of arrears which have fallen due to the respondent as per order dated 30.1.2013 passed by the State Government by which it was ordered by the School Education Department that all the respondents be paid arrears from 1.4.2000 to 9.12.2010 as per 5th Pay Commission but to the extent of 50% and the aforesaid payment shall be subject to the decision in the pending SLP and present writ appeal. (b) The instalments fallen due in 2012-13, i.e., two instalments, shall be paid by the appellants to all the teachers who have not been paid the arrears in compliance of the ord...
T. Sudhakar Pai Vs. Keshav Shivhare
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
M.Cr.C.No.11204/2013 25.9.2013 Shri R.K.Khare, counsel for the applicants. Heard on admission. The applicants have challenged the order dated 6.6.2013 passed by the learned JMFC, Jabalpur in criminal case No.84/2005, whereby arrest warrants were issued against the applicants. The facts of the case, in short, are that, a criminal complaint was registered against the applicants and vide order dated 23.8.2007, the application of the applicants under section 205 of the Cr.P.C.was accepted with certain conditions. Thereafter, the case was going on. On 6.6.2013, non appeared for the applicants and thereafter, the learned JMFC, Jabalpur issued arrest warrants against the applicants. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, it appears that there was a condition that the applicants shall be represented before the Court by some Advocate and on informing the Advocate, they shall appear before the Court, if required. It appears that in order- sheets dated 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »