Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2003MP233; 2004(3)MPLJ216
Dipak Misra, J.1. In the days of yore it was vocally pronounced with immense emphasis that a drum beat may travel to a maximum limit of four miles but the utterances made by one man, through men, is capable of reaching people who are thousand miles away. The medium of man's expression has no limitation. In the modern world the media has irrefragably earned the status of inevitable and indispensable fourth pillar. Freedom of speech and expression has gained immense significance and its utility, by no stretch of imagination, can ever be marginalised and its importance be reduced but, an unavoidable and significant one, there are certain limitations which are imposed by law within the permissible, reasonable or rational, acceptable and non-arbitrary limits. Cinema as a medium of expression and as a mode of entertainment has reached an enviable status in the scientific world. The Indian cinema has a different conception from its inception inasmuch as myths, historical events, poignant nove...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1957MP109; [1957]8STC429(MP)
Newaskar, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of certiorari and prohibition against Sales Tax Officer, Indore, and the State of Madhya Bharat submitted by the petitioner Mahabirprasad Durgaprasad Tamoli, Proprietor of Mahavir Cycle Stores, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Indore. 2. The petitioner owned a shop dealing in bicycle spare parts which he imports from outside the State for the purpose of sale within the State. The Sales Tax authorities found that the petitioner owns a 'pan shop' in Mhow. The petitioner's case in the petition with respect to this pan shop is that the said shop is 'looked after' by his son Babulal who is separate from him for the last 10 years and that the entire income of the said shop which is situated at Mhow, is received by Babulal who lived and messed separately from him. The Sales Tax authorities held the petitioner liable for Sales Tax in respect of his turnover of imported bicycle spare parts for the assessment yea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1966MP261; 1966CriLJ1012
Krishnan, J. 1. The two appeals relate to the same matter as the death reference, one memorandum being sent from jail and the other filed by counsel in Court. The appellant had been put on trial along with two others--his brother-in-law, Kaluji Gujar, and his nephew, Samandar Gujar son of Kaluji--under different sections including 302, 302 read with 34 and 452 I. P. C. the allegation being that the present appellant, condemned man, trespassed into the house in which Amarji was resting, and killed him by hitting him on the head several times with a weapon that has been described as 'pasliwali lohangi' and causing a number of incised wounds including one which fractured the skull and damaged the brain. This is said to have happened at about 2.00 p.m., on 7-11-1902 when Amarji had come to his brother Balaji's house after an earlier incident at the fields between half and one mile away, where Kaluji and his sun are said to have hit him with lathis. They were all jointly committed as the en...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [2000]244ITR845(MP)
Dipak Misra, J. 1. The justifiability of the action of the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation) and the Commissioner of Income-tax, respondents Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, herein, requisitioning the bank draft of the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on December 14, 1996, is called in question in the present writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, a partnership firm.2. The essential facts which require narration for the present litigation are that the petitioner firm is engaged in the business of executing various kinds of work, and contract operation of quarrying of sand on lease basis from the Government of Madhya Pradesh. As set forth in the petition, the partnership-firm submitted earnest money of Rs. 72,60,000 (seventy two lakhs sixty thousand only) in a joint venture along with others with theMadhya Pradesh Matsya Vikas Nigam Limited (her...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP336
Pandey, J.1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against an order dated 27 May, 1961 by which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Indore, rectified under Section 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the Act), an order of his predecessor-in-office dated 29th May, 1957. By the impugned order, the losses allowed to be carried forward and set off were restricted to those incurred in the taxable territories. In this manner, the losses for the assessment year 194849 carried forward and set off were reduced from Rs. 78,123/-to Rs. 1,075/- and those for the assessment year 1949-50 were similarly reduced from Rs. 3,762/- to Rs. 123/-.2. In the assessment years 194849 and 1949-50, the petitioner, who was assessed as -a non-resident, incurred losses, for the most part in the native State of Indore, to the extent of Rs. 78,123/- and Rs. 3,762/- respectively in the life insurance business carried on by it. From 1 December 1949, the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1993)ILLJ1105MP; 1992(0)MPLJ334
1. A common order is passed in this appeal and the connected Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 21 and 22 of 1984, in which the employer is common although the employees are different and common questions of law and fact arise. The three Letters Patent Appeals have been preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge dated September 26, 1984, passed in Misc. Petitions Nos. 1964, 1965 and 1463 of 1982, Employers In Relation to Anand Cinema, Jabalpur v. Mohan Tiwari and Ors., 1985 MPLJ 765, dismissing the above three Writ Petitions filed by the employer, in the cases of the three employees.2. The learned single Judge upheld the award dated October 22, 1982 of the Labour Court passed in common in the cases of the three employees whereby the action of the employer of terminating the services of the employees was held to be a case of illegal 'retrenchment' hence was ab initio void and the employees entitled to reinstatement in service with full back wages. 3. In the three L.P.As. common qu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1990(0)MPLJ621
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. This and other connected petitions for bail, raise and involve a common question of law as regards the scope and amplitude of section 37 of the Narcotic Durgs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (as amended by Amendment Act No. 2 of 1989) for short hereinafter referred to as the. Act.2. Learned counsel on both sides, who include Sarvashri H. S. Oberai, Joshi, and Tiwari for the applicants seeking bail and Shri Khan for the Department of Narcotics and Shri Desai, for the State have forcefully presented their view points. Both agree and rightly so, at this stage, that the factual allegations as made, cannot be disputed; yet Shri Oberai maintained that such procedural lapses on the part of the investigating agency, which would ultimately be materially affecting the prosecution case, would be one such circumstance which should be taken into consideration by the Court, while reaching the satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused is not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)MPHT229
ORDERA.K. Gohil, J.1. The applicant has filed this repeat application under Section 439, Cr.PC for grant of bail, as his earlier application (M.Cr.C. No. 2377/01) was dismissed on 18-6-01, as not pressed.2. The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is in custody in connection with Criminal Complain Case No. 366/01, which has been registered by the A.C.J.M., Mhow, on a complaint made by the J.M.F.C., Mhow, under Sections 107, 109, 119, 120B, 177, 192, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200, 201, 205, 215, 220, 221, 416, 419, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.3. In nutshell, the allegation against the accused in the aforesaid complaint was that a crime, bearing No. 304/2000 was registered at Police Station, Manpur and on the basis of which a Criminal Case No. 309/2000, under Section 34 read with Section 49B of the Excise Act read with Sections 420 and 484, IPC was pending before the J.M.F.C., Mhow, in which one Kailash s/o Meghraj Wadhwani was declared absconder and a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(4)MPHT188
ORDERN.K. Jain, J. 1. 1. The judgment impugned is passed in appeal (Cr. Appeal No. 7/97) by. Addl. Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh, where by the learned A.S.J. while affirming applicant's conviction under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act read with Section 379, IPC, has set aside the sentence of 6 months RI, passed by Judicial Magistrate Second Class, Narsinghgarh in Criminal Case No- 392/99 and instead sentenced the accused-applicant to pay fine Rs. 10,000/- and in default to undergo 4 months SI. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and the PP for the respondent-State in my judgment, not only the judgment passed by the Appellate Court below, but also the one of the Trial Magistrate should be quashed. 3. The offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 as substituted by the Act No. 31 of 1986 is now punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend for 3 years or with fine, which shall not be less than Rs. 1,000/- or with both. Earlier to this Am...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1991MP205; I(1992)DMC96; 1991(0)MPLJ625
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. This is an appeal by the wife/respondent under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), against the decree dated 5-5-89 passed by the Court of Second Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Raipur, declaring her marriage with the respondent/ wife as nullity under Section 12(1)(b) and (c) of the Act. By the judgment and decree under appeal, the trial Court accepted the case of the husband/ plaintiff that the wife was suffering from the mental disorder of the type 'schizophrenia' at the time of their marriage.2. The facts not in dispute are that the parties were married on 22-5-1986. They lived together immediately after the marriage between 23-5-1986 and 4-6-1986 for about 12 days in the first instance. Thereafter the wife had gone back to her parents for a few days and they again in the second period lived together between 13-7-86 and 20-7-86 for about seven days. The total stay of the wife with the husband wa...
Tag this Judgment!