Judgments - Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balaji Chemist Vs. Indian Red Cross Society & The General Secretary
Smt. Nirmala Devi vs. Anil Kumar Tiwari
Law laid down - Held: Section 5 (i) and Section 11 of the Act of 1955, makes it clear that if either party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage and if such marriage is solemnized after commencement of the Act of 1955, the same is void ipso-jure. The fact that whether the other party had the knowledge of existing spouse living at the time of marriage is immaterial Section 11 of the Act of 1955 only prescribes marriages Full Judgment
Akram S/o Amanat Khan & Fazal S/o Taki Khan Vs. State of M.P.
Law Laid Down - Chance Witness- Interested witnessEvidentiary value - (i) If presence of witness is satisfactorily established, his statement cannot be discarded by treating him as mere “chance witness”. The expression ‘chance witnesses’ is borrowed from countries where every man’s home is considered his castle and every one must have an explanation for his presence elsewhere or in another man’s castle. It is a most unsuitable expression in a country whose people are less formal and more casual. (Judgment of Supreme Full Judgment
Rajendra Kumar Raikwar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Law laid down - 1. Compassionate employment is not an alternate method of public employment but the same is given solely on humanitarian grounds with the sole object to provide immediate relief to the employee’s family to tide over the sudden financial crisis and the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right. 2. Compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right as it is not a vested right and the policy prevailing at the time of death, would Full Judgment
Kalla @ Kallu and another Vs. State of M.P.
Gudda @ Lal Sahab & Ors. vs. State of MP
Jhabbu & Ors. vs. State of MP
Gabbar @ Gopal s/o Devpuri Gusai Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Chandresh Shukla Vs. The Registrar, People’s University
Law laid down - The order should clearly reflect the reasons thereof, subsequent explanation or reasons justifying the impugned order not permissible. (See para-10) Recording of reasons for terminating the services in the impugned order is necessary, as the reasons are the heartbeat of any order. Non-speaking orders do not stand judicial scrutiny. (See para-9) Full Judgment
Rajesh Kumar Rathore vs. High Court of M.P. and another
Law laid down - Held:- when the services of a temporary employee or a probationer or contingency paid employee is brought to an end by passing innocuous order due to unsatisfactory nature of service or on account of an act for which some action is taken, but the termination is made in a simplicitor manner without conducting of inquiry or without casting any stigma on the employee, the provisions of Rule 9 of the Rules 1980 can be taken aid of. However, Full Judgment
Chandra Prakash @ Tinku Pandey Vs. The State of M.P. & Others.
Chief General Manager, S.E.C.L vs. Chandramani Tiwari
Kewal Kumar Jaggi & others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & others
Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and others
Mrs. Prachi Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Law laid down - 1. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing cancellation of the bail, already granted. 2. The concept of setting aside the unjustified, illegal or perverse order is totally different from the concept of cancelling the bail on the ground that accused has misconducted himself or because of some new facts requiring such cancellation. 3. Applicant should first move the Court concerned for cancellation of bail bringing out the circumstances as have been mentioned in Annexure Full Judgment
Ved Prakash Sharma Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & ors
Law laid down - Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accordance with the guidelines engrafted in such power namely; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In those cases power to quash the criminal proceedings or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of Full Judgment
Haliman Bee vs. Joya Khan & others.
Law Laid Down - When there is alternative remedy under Section 388(3) of the Indian Succession Act read with Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Misc. petition under Section 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable and only a civil revision lies. Full Judgment