Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-03-2001
Reported in : 2002(79)ECC518; 2001(4)MPHT101; 2001(3)MPLJ218
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. The petitioner who happens to be the wife of the detenu Lahiri Hariya is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the Joint Secretary to Government of India, Revenue Finance Department dated 14-11-2000 whereby by virtue of provisions of Section 3 of Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to for convenience as 'COFEPOSA Act'). Her husband Lahiri Hariya s/o Vasant Hariya r/o 23, Rajesh Nagar, Indore, has been detained. The petitioner mainly attacked the said order on following grounds:--(1) The order of detention has been passed after considerable delay. (2) All necessary and relevant documents have not been furnished to the detenu and it prevented the detenu from filing effective representation and that infringed his fundamental right guaranteed by Art. 22(5) of the Constitution of India. (3) Though it was not demanded, it was the duty of the detaining...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-30-2001
Reported in : 2002(1)MPHT151
U.N. Singh, J. 1. The appellants have preferred the instant criminal appeal against the impugned judgment and findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in S.T. No. 25/90, whereby the accused appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. 2. Succinctly narrated the facts of the case are that the accused persons and deceased Kodulal were on litigating terms due to some land dispute. Deceased Kodulal had stay order in his favour. That apart, the accused were also prosecuted for setting the Khalihan of Kodulal, a fire. In this background the accused were looking for opportunity to take revenge against the deceased. Deceased Kodulal was a school teacher and he used to go daily to Mudera, the place of his working, by cycle. As usual on 1-8-89 the date of incident at about 11.00 o'clock in day lime deceased Kodulal was going by cycle to Mudera. On the way, in a lonely place pear Bhati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-04-2001
Reported in : 2002CriLJ1050; 2002(1)MPHT458; 2002(2)MPLJ267
C.K. Prasad, J. 1. Altogether, 43 persons were put on trial. Out of them, appellants have been held guilty of offence under Sections 302/149, 324/149, 436/149, 452 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life, 2 years, 5 years, 3 years and 2 years respectively by the First Addl. Sessions Judge, Damoh in Sessions Trial No. 41/84 by judgment dated 2-1-1989. Aggrieved by the same, appellants have preferred this appeal.2. According to the prosecution, on 17-3-1984 villagers were invited to the residence of accused Sashikant (since acquitted), the Sarpanch of the village for Fag i.e. singing holi songs on the Dhuredi day, which is celebrated on the following day of Holi. In the said celebration, members of the Chamar caste i.e. a Scheduled Caste community, also participated. After the Fag was over, members of all the communities went to the public temple situated in the midst of the village to sing Fag and after 2-3 songs, the Pujari of the temple ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-16-2001
Reported in : 2001(4)MPHT474
R.B. Dixit, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by Judgment and Order of conviction dated 27-8-1992, passed in Sessions Trial No. 192/86, by IIIrd Additional Judge to the Sessions Judge, Gwalior, whereby convicting the appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life, the appellant has come up in appeal seeking redress praying for setting aside of the aforesaid conviction passed against him. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 26-5-1986 at about 9.30 p.m., when Ram Pal Singh (P. W. 6) had just come from his shop and was putting off his clothes in the court-yard, and his father was taking meals, at that time deceased Chhannu (Baua) came running inside the house shouting for help. The accused/appellant was following him with knife in his hand. He threw the deceased on the ground and started inflicting injuries with knife. The deceased, however, rose and tried to run away when he was caught again by accused and was thrown on a cot. Accused then mercilessly inflic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-13-2001
Reported in : 2001(3)MPHT247; 2001(3)MPLJ348
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to declare the results of the petitioner and further to declare him to have passed in the subject of English.2. The facts as have been unfolded arc that the petitioner was prosecuting his studies in Higher Secondary School, Hinauti, Distt. Rewa. He filled up his form for appearing in the Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination and admit card was issued for the said purpose. He appeared from the examination centre, namely, non-Government Degree College, Lalgaon, Centre No. 1. As averred in the writ petition the petitioner completed his examination and was hopeful for being successful. It is setforth in the petition that the petitioner's result was published in the newspaper as well as in the booklet and it was reflected therein that he had passed the examination i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-05-2001
Reported in : 2001(5)MPHT460; 2002(3)MPLJ163
ORDERJ.G. Chitre, J.1. The petitioner assails the order of appointment of respondent No. 3 as 'Producer' as employee of Devi Ahilya Vishva Vidhyalaya, R.N.T Marg, Indore, (hereinafter referred to as 'University' for convenience). Mainly the said appointment has been assailed on two grounds.- (i) that improper and suspicious practice has been followed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for appointing respondent No. 3 on contract basis for a period of 90 days and the said appointment-assignment was continued for a period of three years by renewing such contractual relations (ii) that the respondent No. 3 did not hold the necessary qualifications which are required for even appointing a lecturer on temporary/ad hoc basis.2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 justified the orders passed in context with such contractual appointment of respondent No. 3 on occasions or for said period of three years. Mainly it was contended that the appointment on contractual basis or otherwise of respondent No. 3 cannot be cat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-2001
Reported in : 2001(5)MPHT662
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner, an ex-service man, has called in question the pregnability of the order passed by the State Government fixing the premium in respect of the land allotted in his favour.2. The facts as have been unfurled are that the petitioner was recruited in the Indian Army as Telecom Technician in the Corps of Signals in the year 1970. He was deployed with his unit to combat 1971 Indo Pak war and had also spent considerable time on posting in field area on the territorial line of Indo Tibet Border. While serving in Indo Tibet Border he suffered severe fatal injury during Sugar Sector Operations and after sustained treatment he was declared medically unfit and was recorded as a disabled person. It is pleaded in the petition that he has been receiving regular pension as well as disability pension under the Indian Army Act and Rules framed thereunder. As averred in the writ petition the State Government issued a circular No. 2069-680-Aa-72 da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-04-2001
Reported in : 2001(5)MPHT338; 2001(3)MPLJ321
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for issue of appropriate writ for quashment of the proceeding in question and the decision taken by the respondents which has led to passing of the impugned order of confiscation of the wooden slabs belonging to them and further to grant any other relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The facts as have been unfolded are that the petitioner No. 1 is a resident of village Garhi Tah. Gairatganj, Distt. Raisen and is the father of petitioner No. 2 who is a resident of Bhopal. The said petitioner with a view to construct a house, purchased a plot in Bhopal from J.P. Grah Nirman Samiti. One Dheeraj Kumar resident of village Garhi Tah. Gairatganj, Distt. Raisen, intended to sell that superstructure. The petitioner No. 1 purchased that superstructure because it had lot of wooden structure....
Tag this Judgment!