1
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1995(0)MPLJ349
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J.1. This is a public interest litigation. The petitioner is a serving medical officer. He has shown concern for the dead in the same manner in which medical profession cares for the living. Railway administration has been arrayed as one of the respondents. The question whether public interest litigation can be resorted in such matters is not res integra. In Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera v. Union of India and others, (1983) 4 SCC 598, Ranganath Misra, J. (as his Lordship then was), took cognizance of a petition filed against the Railways claiming protection under Articles 19 and 21. After taking note of the development of the Railways in this country right from British times, meaningful observations were made in paras 25 and 27 of the report. These read as under :-'We have said earlier that the Railways are a public utility service run on monopoly basis. Since it is a public utility, there is no justification to run it merely as a commercial venture with a view to making ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Regard being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the present cases, the writ petitions were analogously heard and by a common order, they are being disposed of by this Court. Facts of Writ Petition No.4041/2013 are narrated hereunder. In the present case, short point is involved whether under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short SARFAESI Act, 2002), the Chief Judicial Magistrate is competent to take action keeping in view the Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Learned Government Advocate at the outset has drawn attention of this Court towards the judgment delivered by the Full Bench of Madras High Court in case of K. Arockiyaraj V. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputhur and Anr., reported in AIR 2013 MADRAS 206. Paragraph Nos.24, 25, 26 and 27 of the aforesaid judgment read as under:- 24. 'The Executive Magistrate' is mentioned in Section 20, which reads as follows: "20. E...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
S.R. Waghmare, J. 1. These two petitions are taken up together since they arise out of the same cause of action and are therefore, decided by this common order, which shall govern both the petitions. 2. By Writ Petition No. 4941/2014 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Dy. Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Ujjain is aggrieved against the order dated 23/4/2014 passed by the JMFC, Badnagar, Ujjain in Case No. 01/2014, whereby the JMFC ordered that security be paid for the supurdgi of the cash and silver that were to be handed over to the petitioner Income Tax. 3. Whereas, Writ Petition No. 5602/2014 under Article 226 read with Article 19(g) of the Constitution of India has been filed by Rupam, Rajendra P. Gorecha and Nayan Kothari against the Income Tax Department being aggrieved by withholding of the silver bullion without any authority of law. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 11.3.2014, information was received by the petitioner department from t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
1. In view of commonality of facts and issues involved, on the joint request, matters were analogously heard and are decided by this common order. Facts are taken from M.Cr.C.147/2014 2. In these petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C the petitioner has called in question the proceedings of complaint case No. 6199/2013. Shri Raja Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that court below has erred in passing the order dated 06.07.2013 whereby complaint preferred by respondent under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act ( NI Act) is directed to be registered. The present petitioner was served by issuing notice by registered and ordinary post. Criticizing this order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act. In para 4 and 5 of the complaint the description of cheques i.e. date, account number and amount etc were shown. It is further averred that said cheques were bounced. Bank gave finding that insuffic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition u/S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, being aggrieved by order dt. 24/8/2012 passed by the Additional District Judge, Narsingarh, Distt. Rajgarh in Cr. Rev. No. 195 / 2012, by which the revisional Court has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner against order dated 29/7/2011. Facts of the case reveal that a complaint was preferred u/S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by respondent No.2 against the present petitioner on 2/7/2007. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narsingarh sentenced the petitioner for six months imprisonment and fine of Rs.3,30,000/- was imposed against which an appeal was preferred ie., No. 231/2007 and a settlement took place between the parties in Lok Adalat on 25/7/2008. Both the parties agreed to withdraw the pending litigations and in terms of the settlement a condition of payment of Rs.3,51,750/- by cheque dt. 31/12/2008 of State Bank of India, Shujalpur Branch was give...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
1. This Miscellaneous Criminal Case has been instituted on application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. filed for quashing the charge-sheet and proceeding in the Sessions trial No.558/2014 pending in the Court of Shri M.C. Soni, Additional Sessions judge, Jabalpur, (M.P.). 2. It has been submitted here by that the complainant/respondent No.2 Rashmi Shrivas lodged a first information report in P.S. Vijaynagar, District Jabalpur, to the effect with Key Electronic and System Private Limited, Mumbai, which also had a branch office in Noida, represented by accused persons Mukesh Bhardwaj, Punit Gaur, Aman Singh Yadav, Sandeep, Kishore Dhanraj, Ajay, Amit Suhag, Shahil Batra and Bhavna Bansal claiming to be Broker, Marketing Director, Company Head, Director, Manager, Technician etc., cheated the complainant/respondent No.2 Rashmi Shrivas into opening a showroom as franchisee of aforesaid Key Electronic and System Private Limited at Home Science College Road, Right Town, Jabalpur. She paid Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
In view of availability of the case dairy, the application is taken up for consideration. On behalf of the applicant, this application is preferred under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as he is under apprehension of his arrest in connection with Crime No.285/2014 registered at police station, Jhansi Road, Gwalior for the offences of sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B IPC and section 3/4 of Pariksha Adhiniyam. Applicant's counsel Shri Ankur Maheshwari, after taking us through the application as well as the papers placed on record along with rejection order of the Sessions Court, by referring to the first information report said that by fabricating a false story, applicant and his son have been falsely implicated in the matter, while such son of the applicant secured admission in the alleged PG course on the basis of his qualification and ability. In addition, he said that he has not only secured admission in PG course, but he secured first rank in all ove...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C.has been filed by the appellant against the Judgment dated 29.11.05 passed in Sessions Trial No.127/05 by learned Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 25(1-Kha)(k) of the Arms Act and sentenced to R.I. for one year and fine of Rs.1,000 with default stipulation. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.01.05 at about 22.15 hours complainant Bodhan lodged a report alleging that he was resident of Kitpura village and was doing agriculture work. At about 19.00 hours when he was sitting nearby the house of one Dhanprasad with others, appellant came there and asked the complainant to accompany him on the point of 12 bore gun, on refusal by the complainant, appellant threatened to fire and ultimately fired on him resulting in injury on the elbow of complainant. The matter was reported to the police and Crime No. 9/05 for offence punishable under Sections 307 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Sushil Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.257/14 registered at P.S. Badarwas, District Shivpuri, for the offence punishable under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (In short Act of 1955). 3. As per prosecution case, complainant Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Senior Agriculture Development Officer, Block Badarwas has lodged the report at Police Station Badarwas that sample of Vantolite Sulphur 90% Batch No. BNS 011 taken on 25.01.2014, which was supplied by Aviral Bio-Tech and Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd., Mandideep, Raisen and same was sent for examination at Quality Control Laboratory, Bhopal, was found sub-standard. On this report, police has registered offence under section 3/7 of Act of 1955 against the applicant who is the Manager of quality control. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, here-in-after referred to the Code , has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by order dated 24.03.2014, passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Anuppur in Criminal Revision No.04/2014, arising out of order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the Court of Gram Nyayalaya, Anuppur in M.Cr.C. No.187/2010, whereby the Sessions Court maintained the awarded interim maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondent/wife. 2. The respondent filed an application under Section 12, 20, 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2005, here-inafter in short Do. Vio. Act , against the applicant before learned Gram Nyayalaya, Anuppur for claiming maintenance. It was alleged in main application that marriage between the parties was performed on 23.04.2006 at Virasani Devi Mandir, Birsinghpur Pali and they resided together as husband-wife till April 2009 and after that the applicant left the respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!