Madhya Pradesh Court February 2014 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.
Mohammad Akram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
WP No.2388/2014 11/02/2014 Shri Narendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents on advance copy Heard on the question of admission. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has claimed the following relief: (i)That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the notice whereby the petitioner was directed to appear on 22.1.2014, before the Tahsildar District Sagar, and the petitioner was further orally directed to appear on 6.2.2014 and was warned by the respondent Tahsildar that on the same date i.e.on 6.2.2014 his constructions would be demolished. (ii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to not to take any coercive action over the shop of Late Shri Kanchedilal situated at Block No.31 Plot No.1 measuring 20x14 = 280 sq.ft. (iii) Any other relief/reliefs/ordeRs.direction/directions which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper may ...
Yogendra Singh Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
WP No.299/14 11.2.2014 Shri Jitendra Arya, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State on advance copy. On the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I.A.No.196/2014, filed by the petitioner for exemption from filing the court fee is dismissed as not pressed as it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the court fees has already been deposited and paid on 5.3.2014. Heard the learned counsel for the parties on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition claiming parity with the petitioners of W.P.No.19419/2013 which was disposed of by this Court on 22.11.2013 in the light of the order passed in W.P.No.602/2010 (s) (Mohanlal & ORS.versus State of M.P.) with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation filed by the petitioners praying for grant of a regular pay scale on the post of Shiksha Karmi from the date of completion of three years of the probation pe...
Ashok Kol Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
M.Cr.C.No.2049/14 11.02.2014 Shri Pushpendra Verma, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Umesh Pandey, learned Govt. Adv.for State/respondent. Heard. Learned P.L.submits that he is under receipt of the case diary. As the case diary is available hence, the matter is taken up for final disposal. Heard. On behalf of the applicant, this petition is preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.for grant of bail to the applicant as he is in custody since 22.04.2013, in connection of Crime No.69/13, registered at Police Station Bahari, District Sidhi for the offence under Sections 302, 201 and 404/34 of I.P.C.Applicants counsel after taking me through the rejection order of the trail Court and other papers placed on the record, by referring the depositions of the examined prosecution witnesses agued that, on appreciation of such evidence, the ingredients of the alleged offence of Section 302 of I.P.C.is not made out against him. In continuation he said that, whatsoever evidence collected by the p...
Devaji Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
Criminal Revision No.52/2013 11.02.2014 Shri Satyam Agrawal, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1-State. Heard on admission. This Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C.has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved by the order dated 9.11.2012 passed in ST No.212/12 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge Astha District Sehore whereby the respondents No.2 and 3 were discharged from the charge of offence under Sections 467 and 468 of IPC and the matter was remanded back to the JMFC concerned for the trial of offence under Section 420 of IPC. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents No.2 & 3 obtained some amount from the applicants so that sons of the applicants would have been obtained a job in the Military. However, such job could not be provided, and therefore the respondent Satpal Singh Yadav issued two cheques to return the amount, but the cheques were dishonoured. Under such circumstances, the police enhance...
Brajlal Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
M.Cr.C.No.1700/14 11.02.2014 Shri Ashish Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Pradeep Gupta, learned P.L.for the State/respondent. Heard. On behalf of the applicants, this petition is preferred under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants, as they are under apprehension of their arrest in connection of Crime No.13/13, registered at Police Station AJ.Tikamgarh, for the offence under Sections 323, 324, 506(B)/34 of I.P.C.and under Section 3(1) (x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Initially after taking me through the rejection order of the Sessions Court and other papers placed on the record applicants counsel argued the case at length for allowing this petition, but in view of mandatory provision of Section 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, creates bar to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail with respect of the offence of such Act, on making certain query ...
Smt. Shakuntala Shrivastava Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
Smt. Shakuntala Shrivastava & ORS.versus Union of India & ORS.M.C.C.No.130 / 2014 11.2.2014. Shri Sharad Verma, learned counsel for the applicants. This application has been filed for restoration of M.C.C.No.1600/2007, which has been dismissed due to non- compliance with the peremptory order passed on 2.7.2007 for restoration of W.P.No.5669/2006 (s).A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.7.2007 in M.C.C.No.1600/2007 directed for restoration of the writ petition subject to deposit of a cost of `75/- with the High Court Legal Service Committee within seven days. It is stated that the clerk of the counsel forgot to deposit the amount of `75/-, as a result the M.C.C.was not restored and it was deemed to have been dismissed. It is stated that under the apprehension that the writ petition has been restored no action was taken and when the applicants made inquiries from the counsel with regard to pendency of the writ petition records were searched and it is only very recently that ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rakesh Lodh Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
M.Cr.C.No.930/2012 11.2.2014 Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the applicant/State. Heard on admission. The State has preferred the present application for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 17.10.2011 passed by the FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in ST No.54/2010 whereby the respondents were acquitted from the charges of Section 304 (Part II) and 201 of I.P.C.passed by The prosecution's case in short is that the deceased Savitri @ Javitri was found dead in the field of respondent Ram Das on 16.1.2010. It was alleged that she went to answer the call of nature and thereafter, she sustained injuries due to electrocution because the respondents took an illegal connection from the main line to the motor of the respondents. After death of the deceased the respondents removed that temporary line. An intimation was given to the Police and the body of the deceased Savitri @ Javitri was sent for post mortem. Dr.B.S. Yadav (PW9) found that the deceased died due to elect...
Smt. Rekha Patale Vs. Smt. Sangita Nagdeve Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
Smt. Rekha Patale versus Smt. Sangita Nagdeve & ORS.Writ Petition No.18471 / 2011 11.2.2014. Ms.Sandhya Rajak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.P.Rai, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State. Matter pertains to rejection of petitioner's claim for appointment on the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta. An advertisement was issued for appointment on the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta in centre Pipariya, Tehsil Waraseoni and petitioner and respondent No.1 were the candidates who had submitted their candidature for appointment to the post in question. A merit list was prepared in which respondent No.1 was placed at Sr.No.1 having obtained 53.5% marks and petitioner was placed at Sr.No.3 having obtained 52.5% marks. Based on the work of the petitioner as Aasha Worker petitioner claimed grant of four marks for experience and when it was not granted to her, the matter went in an appeal at the instance of petitioner to the Additional Collector and the Commissioner and both the auth...
Drigpal Sisngh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.18377/2012 Drigpal Singh. Vs State of Madhya Pradesh and otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi.J.Shri R.K.Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. ORDER (11.02.2014) The petitioner, a Constable was subjected to a departmental enquiry on account of allegation levelled against him by the Superintendent of Police, Chhatarpur. It was alleged that the petitioner, who was a driver, took the Government vehicle in intoxicated condition on a public place and committed a serious misconduct. The petitioner also caused damage to the police station. The enquiry was conducted after obtaining the reply of the petitioner and a finding was given holding that the petitioner was guilty of the misconduct. The previous record of services of the petitioner was taken note of and a major penalty of removal from service was imposed on the petitioner. An appeal was preferred by the ...
Through Director Chandrasekhar Prasad Singh S/o D.B.Singh M/s S.K.J. a ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
Writ Petition No.1176/2014 11/02/2014 Shri Himanshu Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 7.12.2013 has approached this Court calling in question the correctness of the said order on the grounds that he was a successful bidder for its appointment as Handling Agent for lifting of the coal and an agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondent on 7th October, 2009. The said agreement was for a period of three yeaRs.which expired and, therefore, an extension was ordered vide order dated 12.9.2012 for a period of one year. Thereafter, proceedings were done, notice inviting tender was issued and work was assigned to the petitioner, but no agreement was being executed between the petitioner and the respondent. A prayer was made for execution of an agreement in full, but that was not done. Therefore, the petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P.No.145/2013. Though the claim was conte...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »