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.
Ku. Pushpa Vs. Shri R.K. Swai Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
1 Conc. No.2495 / 2013. 07/02/2014. Smt. Sonali Shrivastava, Advocate for the applicant. This application has been filed seeking initiation of action for contempt. There is a delay of more than two years in filing the application for contempt. It is said that the directions issued by this court on 23.3.2011 in W.P.No.11847/09 have not been complied with. The said writ petition was filed by the petitioner and it was the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioners father was illegally and wrongly confined by the respondents No.4 to 6. The matter was looked into and it was found that after investigation in crime No.624/09, offences under sections 120, 120-B, 364, 365 and 506 of IPC have been registered and the sessions trial is pending in the Session Court at Katni being Sessions Trial No.147/10. It was found that the respondent No.4 have been discharged in the sessions trial. Taking note of all these factORS.following orders have been passed in the writ petition :- In view of afores...
Rajpal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
Cr.R.No.155/14 07.02.2014 Shri R.P.Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri V.P.Tiwari, learned P.L.for the State. This revision is listed today for appropriate order on the question of default raised by the Office. According to which, the requisite information regarding custody of the applicant whether he is in jail or on bail, has not been stated in the revision memo as well as in the impugned application for suspension of the jail sentence. It is apparent fact that this revision is preferred against the conviction and sentence of the applicant under Section 325 of I.P.C.for R.I.6 months with fine of Rs.1,000/- In view of rule 48 Chapter X of M.P.High Court Rules 2008, unless the applicant is surrendered in the custody for facing the awarded jail sentence by the appellate Court, the application for suspension of the jail sentence could not be treated to be complete and in such premises, unless the revision is preferred in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the afor...
Ashokveer Vikram Singh @ Bhaiya Raja Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh J ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
Criminal Appeal No :: 1855 / 2013 Ashokveer Vikram Singh @ Bhaiya raja versus State of MP0702.2014. Shri Anil Khare, Senior Advocate, with Shri Harjas Singh Chawra for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General, for the State/respondent. Shri Sumit Raghuvanshi for the complainant. I.A.No.26272/2013 is an application under section 389(1) CrPC for grant of bail to the appellant who has been convicted under sections 302/120-B IPC, and under sections 25(1-B)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous life imprisonment. Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant argued that the appellant has been implicated in the case based on certain statements made by co-accused Bhupendra Singh @ Halke Bhaiya. It is also stated that the criminal conspiracy with regard to the appellants role is not established. It was also argued that Co.accused Abhimanyu @ Abbu, who was present on the spot has been let off. Taking us through the statement of witnesses and the find...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Virendra @ Viren Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
M.Cr.C.No.5930/2012 M.Cr.C.No.5930/2012 7.2.2014 Shri S.D.Khan, G.A.for the State/applicant. Heard on admission. The State has preferred the present application for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 14.3.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pawai, District Panna in S.T.No.49/2010, whereby the respondents were acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under sections 332, 333 and 353 of IPC. The prosecution's case, in short, is that, on 31.5.2009, a police force went to the house of the respondents Arjun etc.to arrest Arjun Singh etc.Force was comprised with SDOP, Shri Avanish Bansal (P.W.4).Constable Id-ul-Baksh (P.W.2).Constable Kishori Lal (P.W.3).Constable Sunil Mishra (P.W.5) and other officeRs.The respondents Arjun Singh, Virendra Singh and Gulab Singh were arrested and thereafter, the respondents came with the sticks etc.and started assaulting them and therefore, the victims Id-ul-Baksh, Kishori Lal and Sunil Mishra sustained injuries. Out...
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Syed Javed Akhtar Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
M.C.C.No.778/2005 State Bank of India & ORS.versus Syed Javed Akhtar 07/02/2014 Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the applicants. None appears for the respondent, even though served and represented by counsel. Seeking review/ recall of an order dated 10.8.2004 passed by a bench of this Court in W.P.(s)No.5141/2004, whereby in a pending departmental enquiry, respondent/ employee was permitted to take assistance of a lawyer, this application has been filed for review. It is pointed out by Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the applicants that the petition was disposed of without notice to the Bank concerned and based on certain provisions of the rules, without hearing the Bank, an order has been passed for permitting engagement of the lawyer for defending the employee concerned. It is indicated in the review application that the question of engagement of the lawyer for defending the employee is subject to various conditions as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various ...
K.N. John Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
1 Writ Petition No. 2263 /2014 7.2.2014 Shri K.P. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Bisen, learned counsel for respondent State. Petitioners, employee of M.P. State Cooperative Oil Seed Growers Federation on deputation to M.P. State Agriculture Marketing Board, Bhopal vide this petition while seeks direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of Vth and VI th Pay Commission. At the outset it is urged that the issue raised in this petition has been answered in W.P. No. 5680/2009 (S) _ Dinkar Pratap Singh Chouhan and another v. State of M.P. and others decided on 23.3.2011. The said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to grant the benefit of V th and VIth Pay Commission. The State Government aggrieved by said order preferred Writ Appeal No. 361/2011 which was dismissed on 27.7.2011. The Division Bench while dismissing ...
Praveen Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Sh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.712/2011 Praveen and 5 others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh .................................................................................................... Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate with Shri Nishant Datt, counsel for the applicants. Shri S.D.Khan, G.A for the respondent/State. Shri Ranvir Singh, counsel for the Objector. .................................................................................................... ORDER (Delivered on the 7th day of February, 2014) The applicants have preferred the present revision against the order dated 1.4.2011 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Betul in ST. No.66 of 2011 whereby the charges of offences punishable under section 304-B or 302 of I.P.C or Section 306 of I.P.C and Section 498-A of I.P.C and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act were appended against the applicants.2. The prosecution's...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Daulat Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
M.CR.C.No.12429/2011 7.2.2014 Shri S.D.Khan, G.A for the applicant/State. Heard on admission. The State has preferred an application for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 19.7.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate FiRs.Class in Criminal Case No.2306/2009 whereby the respondents were acquitted from the charges of Sections 435 or 435 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.The prosecution's case in short is that on 21.3.2005 at about 11.30 a.m in the morning, some grams of the complainant Nonelal Ahirwar was kept in his khalihaan at Village Rohani (Police Station Nohata, District Damoh).It was alleged that the respondents set the grams on fire and caused loss to the complainant and his family. An FIR Ex.P/1 was lodged by the complainant Nohelal Ahirwar and thereafter, the charge sheet was filed against the respondents. The respondents abjured their guilt. They did not take any specific plea but, they stated that they were falsely implicated in the matter. No defence evidence was...
Smt. Sangeeta JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
1 W.P.No.2076/2014 W.P.No.2076/2014 07.02.2014 Shri S.Singh, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State. Petitioners initially appointed as Shiksha Karmis under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998. Subsequently, being absorbed as Adhyapak in pursuance to the Madhya Pradesh Adhyapak Samvarg (Employment and Conditions of service) Rules 2008 and granted regular pay-scale with effect from 01.04.2007 seeks direction to the respondents to grant regular pay-scale from the date of their initial appointment as Shiksha Karmi. During the couRs.of submission, it is being stated by learned counsel for petitioners that similarly situated persons have approached this Court vide writ petition No.602/2010(s) : Mohanlal and ors.v.State of Madhya Pradesh decided on 22.01.2010 & writ petition No.4720/2013 : Jitendra Yadav v. State of Madhya Pradesh and these petitions w...
Pradhuman Kumar Choudhari Vs. Smt. Munni Bai Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
1 W.P. No. 7031 Of 2013 7.2.2014 Ms. Sandhya Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner None for respondents. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 18.3.2013; whereby, the Trial Court despite of failure of the defendant to deposit rent in pursuance to direction dated 3.8.2011 has granted time to deposit the arrears,instead of striking the defence. Subsection (6) of Section 13 M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 stipulates "(6)If a tenant fails to deposit or pay any amount as required by this section, the Court may order the defence against eviction to be struck out and shall proceed with the hearing of the suit, appeal or proceeding, as the case may be." That, on 3.8.2011 on an application under Section 13 (6) of 1961 Act, direction to the following effect was given: "izLrqr okn oknxzLr Hkou dz- 533].o 534].lat; xka/kh okMZ rg- o ftyk tcyiqj e0 iz0 ds laca/k esa...