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.
Pankaj Shukla @ Martyand Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
Criminal Appeal No.1531/2013 20/09/2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Counsel with Shri Siddharth Datt, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudesh Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. Shri Sumit Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the Objector. They are heard on I.A.No.21166/13, which is the fiRs.application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant Pankaj Shukla @ Martyand Shukla. Appellant stand convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 120-B of IPC and has been sentenced to suffer RI for Life with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations as mentioned in the impugned judgment. On bare perusal of the impugned judgment this Court finds that although the appellant was charged under section 302, 120-B of IPC and also u/s 201 of IPC but he has been acquitted from the charge punishable u/s 201 of IPC. We have gone through the judgment as well as the evidence. Shri Sudesh Verma, learned Public Prosecutor has...
Birendra Kuswaha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15139/2013 Birendra Kuswaha vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 20.09.2013 Shri Monesh Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the award dated 11.07.2012 passed by the Labour Court, Rewa whereby the dispute raised by the petitioner against his discontinuance from service w.e.f.29.12.1999 has been rejected. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a perusal of the statement of the Management witness Shri O.N.Mishra clearly indicates that the petitioner has worked with the authorities for more than 240 days, therefore, the findings recorded by the Labour Court to the contrary, being perveRs.deserves to be set aside and the impugned order deserves to be quashed. It is further prayed that the respondent be directed to reinstate the petitioner. Having heard the learned counsel f...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Bholanath Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.13359/2012 20.9.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, Government Advocate for the appellant. 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 for the offences punishable under Sections 307 read with Section 34, 294, 506 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC').The corresponding judgment was passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Singrouli in Sessions Trial No.160/2010 on 7.8.2012. By the impugned judgment only, respondents were convicted under Section 323 (on two counts) of the IPC and were released on probation of good conduct for a period of two yeaRs.Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 16.11.2007 at about 6:30 pm at Dudhichua Colony NCL, respondents, in furtherance of their common intention, attempted murder of Rahul (PW7) by inflicting injuries with the Butt of Kudali on his head and inflicted simple injuries to Awdhesh Tiwar...
Smt. Anapurna Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15898 of 2013 1 Smt. Anapurna Pandey and others vs State of M.P.and others 20/09/2013 Shri Pradeep Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents/State. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the issue relating to the claim made in this writ petition has already been decided on number of occasions and pursuance to such ordeRs.the State Government has granted benefit to certain persons. In support of his submissions learned counsel for the petitioners relied on decisions rendered by this Court in W.P.No.14427 of 2013 Smt. Pushpa Malhotra and others vs State of M.P.and others decided on 26.08.2013 and in W.P.No.18771 /2011, M.P.Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh versus State of M.P.and another , decided on 29.01.2013. It is further contended that the same order was made applicable by this Court in the case of Guhas Singh Maravi versus State of M.P.and otheRs.W.P.No.5516 / 2 0 0 5 , decided on 27.04.2005....
Hari Prasad Jaiwal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15168/2013 (H.P.Jaiswal and another versus State of MP and otheRs.20.09.2013 Heard Shri K.C.Ghildiyal, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 22.12.2011 by which the claim of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III has been rejected inspite of selection in the competitive examination by relying upon the circulars dated 05.10.2009 and 07.12. 2009 which require the petitioners to have continuously worked on the post of InstructORS.Supervisor in the non formal education programme for a period of 12 months prior to appearing in the examination. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subsequent to the impugned order this court in W.P.No.14778/12 by order dated 11.09.2012 by which the orders issued by the State Government on 05.10.2009 and 07.12.2009 and 15.12.2009 which prescribe that the instructors should have wo...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ibrahim Hafiz
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.7462/2013 20.09.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, 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 12/3/2013 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen, in Sessions Trial No.312/2011, whereby the respondent has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that in the night intervening 27 and 28/11/2010, under a false promise to marry, respondent kidnapped the prosecutrix and persistently subjected her to sexual assault. Upon the report of her father, Crime was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet was filed. Learned Government Advocate submitted that the impugned judgment was passed without proper appreciation of evidence on record and the same d...
Hemant Gurdekar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15081/2013 (Hemant Gurdekar and another versus State of MP and otheRs.20.09.2013 Heard Smt. D.K.Bohre, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 31.05.2013 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, (Revenue) Seoni whereby the authority concerned on account of misappropriation of funds has passed the order against the petitioners and has also directed that two annual increments of the petitioners be withheld. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.3 has no power or authority to take up the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioners as the competent authority is the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat in accordance with the provisions of the M.P.Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 2011. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.it is observed that the impugned order has been passed by the authority in purported exerc...
Municipal Corporation Vs. Dr.Santosh Shrivastava
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
1 W.P.No.6524/09. 20.9.2013. Shri Piyush Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri A.K.Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1 to 6. Shri A.K.Chourasiya, learned G.A.for the respondent No.7. In compliance of earlier order this matter is listed today for final disposal at motion stage and with the consent of the parties the same is taken up for consideration. Heard. On behalf of the the petitioneRs.defendants this petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the Order dated 6.5.2009 (Ann. P.4).passed by 3rd Additional Civil Judge to the Court of 1st Civil Judge Class-I, Bhopal in Civil Suit No.2-A/2009, whereby his application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC to implead the allotees of shops constructed over the disputed land by the petitioner as defendants in the matter. Having heard the counsel keeping in view his arguments I have carefully gone through the papers placed on record along with the impugned order. Respondent No.1 to 6...
Smt. Reva Chakarvati Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
W.P.No.15895 of 2013 1 Smt. Reva Chkarvati and others vs State of M.P.and others 20/09/2013 Shri Pradeep Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents/State. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the issue relating to the claim made in this writ petition has already been decided on number of occasions and pursuance to such ordeRs.the State Government has granted benefit to certain persons. In support of his submissions learned counsel for the petitioners relied on decisions rendered by this Court in W.P.No.14427 of 2013, Smt. Pushpa Malhotra and others vs State of M.P.and others decided on 26.08.2013 and in W.P.No.18771 /2011, M.P.Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh versus State of M.P.and another , decided on 29.01.2013. It is further contended that the same order was made applicable by this Court in the case of Guhas Singh Maravi versus State of M.P.and otheRs.W.P.No.5516 / 2 0 0 5 , decided on 27.04.2005....
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dinesh Soni
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.7449/2013 20.9.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned 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 18.3.2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagod, District Satna, in Sessions Trial No.319/2012, whereby respondent has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the Act').Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 9/9/12 at about 5 p.m., respondent after kidnapping the prosecutrix, took her from Satna to Ratlam, forcibly married her and subjected her to sexual assault. The said facts were narrated by the prosecutrix to her parents upon her recovery on 28/9/12 consequent to investigation into missing person report lodged by her mother Uma Soni (PW2) at Police Station Nagaud. According...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »