Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-25-2010
Rakesh Saksena, J.1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of both the above appeals, since both the appeals arise out of the common impugned judgment.2. Appellants Sheikh Sayeed, Sheikh Anees and Kishore have filed the above appeals against the judgment dated 6th May, 2000 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) and Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Special Case No. 36/99 convicting them under Sections 302, 397 read with Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentencing them to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5000/-, rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine of Rs. 3000/- and imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 10,000/- on each respectively. Appellant Rev Singh of Criminal Appeal No. 2567/2000 has been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5000/-. Though appellants Sheikh Say...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on : Jul-21-2010
1. Learned Additional Sessions Judge Begamganj, Raisen vide impugned judgment dated 10.4.2001 passed in Sessions Trial No. 124 of 2000 recorded conviction of accused/appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default he has to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Being aggrieved, the present appeal under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred.2. Facts in brief are that complainant Naval Singh (PW1) and Hariram (since deceased) went to village Chandora. At about 1.00 a.m. complainant, Hariram and Narayan went to drink liquor at Motiakheda. When they were drinking liquor at the house of Pratap Banjara, appellant Diwan Singh and co- accused Bhairo Singh also reached there and all five persons consumed liquor together. When they all were proceeding towards Chandora, in the way near the Tapra of Kishanlal, Hariram (deceased) and appellant Diwan Singh quarreled on the disp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on : Nov-23-2010
1. This criminal appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 28/07/2008 passed by the 11th Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bhopal in ST No.133/2008 whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of IPC and was inflicted with the sentence of 10 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 366-A of IPC and 7 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of IPC, whereas no separate sentence was inflicted for the offence under Section 363 of IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It was also directed that a sum of Rs.10,000/- be provided to the prosecutrix as a compensation out of the fine amount, if deposited. 2. It is admitted that the prosecutrix as well as the appellant-accused belongs to Scheduled Tribe "Bhilala" and they were governed by their custom.3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the prosecutrix aged 15 years was staying wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on : Aug-04-2010
1. The appellant/defendant has directed this appeal under Section 100 of the CPC being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8.9.2009 passed by 20 t h Additional District Judge , District Jabalpur in regular civil appeal No.27-A/09 affirming the judgment and decree dated 24.2.2009 passed by the 11 t h Civil Judge Class-I, Jabalpur in original civil suit No. 112-A/08, decreeing the suit of the respondent for eviction against the appellant with respect of a shop the non-residential accommodation described in the plaint, situated in Adhartal, Jabalpur.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that respondent herein filed the suit for eviction against the appellant, with respect of the above-mentioned shop situated in Adhartal, Jabalpur, described with all particulars in the plaint and also shown in the annexed map with the plaint, on the ground of arrears of rent under section 12(1)(a) and also on the ground of his bonafide genuine requirement of the disputed accommodation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on : Aug-18-2010
1. The petitioners have filed this application for review alleging that the respondent authorities, inspite of the orders passed by this Court in W.P No.9853/2009 dated 24.09.2009, have colluded and sold the petitioners' property to respondent no.5 although the petitioners were willing to deposit the entire loan amount. This Court by order dated 24.09.2009 in W.P No.9853/2009 had passed the following order:-"The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated against him under the provisions of M.P. Lokdhan (Shodhya Rashiyon Ki Vasuli) Niyam, 1988 whereby the petitioner's property has been put up for auction on 7.8.2009. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is willing to deposit the entire outstanding amount towards the bank as well as the expenditure if any incurred by the auction purchaser and submits that in view of the aforesaid the property be returned to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid statement of the learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on : Nov-26-2010
1. By feeling aggrieved from the judgment and conviction dated 13.5.1996 passed by Special Judge, Satna in Spl. Case No.89/95 in which each of the appellants have been convicted u/s 323 read with section 34 of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 3 months each and fine of Rs.500/- each in default one month's rigorous imprisonment each.2. In nutshell prosecution case is that the appellants have voluntarily caused injuries to Smt. Sukbariya, Bheemsen, Babulal, and Bulli Prasad who were members of Scheduled Castes. A report was lodged at Police Station and police after usual investigation filed challan against the appellants for the offence u/s 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to, for short, 'the Act, 1989').3. The appellants were charged for the offence u/s 323 of IPC and u/s 3(1)(x) of the Act, 1989.4. The appellants abjured the guilt. Their defence was that they have been falsely implicated.5. Learned Special Judge, Sa...
Tag this Judgment!