Filter by Date
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Oriental College Amarwada, Main Road, Amarwada vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

WRIT PETITION, 26353 of 2021, Judgment Date: Jan 06, 2022

Law laid down -  The Madhya Pradesh Sah Chikitsiya Parishad Adhiniyam, 2000 and Madhya Pradesh Para Medical Education (Norms and Guidelines for Establishment of Para Medical Institutions) Rules, 2007 and M.P. Ayur Vigyan Vishwavidyalaya Act, 2011 "Vishwavidyalay Act' and Madhya Pradesh Ayurvigyan Vishwavidyalaya (Condition for Colleges/Institutions to admit the Privileges of the University and Withdrawal of such Privileges) Statute, 2013 ('Statute, 2013'). (1) The running of an Institution depends on the recognition and affiliation by different statutory bodies constituted under the said enactments Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Canara Bank v. Bank of India & others

WRIT PETITION, 5260 of 2021, Judgment Date: Jan 06, 2022

Law laid down -  1. The sole question which falls for consideration of this Court is whether the jurisdiction of an Arbitrator to pass the award can still be challenged in the execution proceedings of the award in the Civil court under the provisions of Section 47 of the Code, as according to Section 36 of the Arbitration Act, an arbitral award is to be executed by the Civil Court in the same manner as if it were a decree of Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Gayatri Parashar Versus Tulsiram Kori.

Criminal Revision, 490 of 2021, Judgment Date: Jan 05, 2022

Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Saddam @ Saddu vs. State of MP

MCRC, 63513 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 30, 2021

Law laid down -  1. There is a clear distinction between theft and robbery, as theft is robbery when there is an element of physical injury or an attempt to cause physical injury or of fear of causing the same. It is also apparent that in the case of robbery, not only the person who voluntarily causes a wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint, is liable to be prosecuted under Section Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Gangaram S/o Shri Kanha Ji Versus Commissioner, Indore Division & another

WRIT PETITION, 9213 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 30, 2021

Law laid down - 1. This Court has no hesitation to hold that this Court would have jurisdiction to decide this dispute between the parties and to look into legality and proprietary of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Burhanpur falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Principal Seat at Jabalpur which has been affirmed in appeal by the Commissioner, Indore Division within the jurisdiction of Indore bench of this court. ( Para 8) 2. In case of externment order, it is Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Balmukund S/o Ramdevsingh Gautam vs. The District Magistrate & others

WRIT PETITION, 26650 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 30, 2021

Law laid down -  1. M. P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990- S.8. District Magistrate is not obliged to furnish the copies of all the cases registered against the petitioner and merely mentioning of the crime numbers along with the offences under which those cases have been registered would suffice for the purpose of proceedings under the Adhiniyam. It is for the petitioner to demonstrate that either those cases on which the respondents have relied upon have not been registered against him Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Jabalpur Treasure Island Pvt. Ltd. & others v. State of Madhya Pradesh & others

WRIT PETITION, 369 of 2020, Judgment Date: Dec 30, 2021

Law laid down - 1. A harmonious reading of sub-section (2), (3) and (4) of S.18 of MSMED Act, 2006 clearly reveals that even if the Facilitation council has acted as a Conciliator, it can still act as an Arbitrator as provided u/s.18(4) of MSMED Act, 2006. 2. Once a notice is served on a party under s.18 of the MSME Act, it would hold good for Conciliation proceedings as also the Arbitration proceedings to be taken up by the Facilitation Council, Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Suneel Prakash Sharma & Others Vs. Vivek Kumar Ruthiya & Another

MP, 32 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 21, 2021

Law laid down -  Held: The power under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC for appointment of Commissioner can also be exercised in order to ascertain the correct factual position, if the same is not ascertainable on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence. Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Manoj Parmar vs. Union of India and others

MCRC, 34709 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 21, 2021

Law laid down - Held: 1. Section 407 of Cr.P.C. is an assurance of fair trial. 2. A litigant cannot choose a Bench of his choice. It is only an exceptional circumstances, where the existence of “bias” or “likelihood of bias” when apparent on the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court can invoke its discretionary power under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. In the absence of an allegation of “pre-existing bias”, the power of transfer of a case should normally Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Smt. Pushpa Sen vs. Manoj Sen

FA, 1085 of 2019, Judgment Date: Dec 21, 2021

Law laid down -  Held : Appellant-wife filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 for restitution of conjugal rights after filing three different proceedings against the respondent-husband and his relatives. It cannot be said that the respondent-husband has withdrawn the company of appellant-wife without any reasonable excuse and, hence, no decree under section 9 of the Act can be granted. Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Roshan and others Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Criminal Appeal, 1481 of 2010, Judgment Date: Dec 21, 2021

Full Judgment

Tags Murder
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Shiv Kumar Singh and another Vs. State of M.P.

MCRC, 52754 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 16, 2021

Law laid down - For the purpose of invoking the provisions of Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the conditions of Section 63 has to be satisfied first then only secondary evidence can be allowed. Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Gangashankar Dubey Versus Smt. Sindhu Bai and Others.

MP, 591 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 15, 2021

Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Kamal Singh Rawat Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Criminal Appeal, 715 of 2013, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2021

Full Judgment

Tags Murder
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Pratham National Security vs. Union of India & Others

WA, 768 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2021

Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Gangaram Prajapati vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others

WRIT PETITION, 16947 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2021

Law laid down -  1. The order of preventive detention for its sustainability needs to satisfy compliance of the procedural mandate of Section 3(3) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 obliging the District Magistrate, who passes the order of preventive detention to forthwith report to the State Government. 2. The expression “forthwith” used in Section 3(3) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 means immediately without any unnecessary unexplained Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Deenbandhu Saket Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others.

WRIT PETITION, 22576 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2021

Law laid down - The delinquent employee in a disciplinary proceeding has a statutory right under Rule 18(4) of M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, to engage a Defence Assistant for which the Disciplinary Authority/Inquiry Officer ought to assist the delinquent employee so that the requirement of reasonable opportunity of being heard is satisfied. Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Kuldeep Singh Rajawat Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Criminal Appeal, 502 of 2011, Judgment Date: Dec 13, 2021

Full Judgment

Tags Murder
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

Naresh Vs. State of M.P

CRR, 2791 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 13, 2021

Full Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

The State of M. P. vs. Sanjay

Criminal Revision, 883 of 2021, Judgment Date: Dec 10, 2021

Law laid down - Where the minimum sentence is less than 10 years but the maximum sentence is not death or life imprisonment then Section 167 (2) (a) (ii) will apply and the accused will be entitled to grant of “default bail” after 60 days in case charge-sheet is not filed. In view of the same, since the maximum sentence provided u/s.467 of IPC is life imprisonment, regardless that the minimum sentence is less then 10 years, the period of filing Full Judgment