Judgments - Madhya Pradesh High Court
Atul Kumar Ben and another Vs. Union of India and others
Law Laid Down:- Any undeserved or unfair advantage gained by a party invoking the jurisdiction of the Court, in the facts of the case, must be neutralized, as the institution of litigation cannot be permitted to confer any advantage on a party by the delayed action of the Court. No litigant can derive any benefit from the mere pendency of a case in a Court of Law, as the interim order always merges into the final order to be passed in Full Judgment
Sabit Khan Vs. State of M.P. and others
Law laid down - 1. Section 19 of the PC Act requires previous sanction for prosecution. Sub section (3) thereof puts a rider that absence of or any error, irregularities etc. in sanction will not be a ground to reverse a finding or sentence unless in the opinion of the Court failure of justice has infact occasioned thereby. Sub section (4) thereof relates to raising an objection in this regard at an early stage in the proceedings. 2. The Act of granting Full Judgment
Sapphire Institute of Nursingh and Science Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Law laid down - Madhya Pradesh Ayurvigyan Vishwavidyalay (Eligibility and Enrolment of Students for Under Graduate Courses) Ordinance, 2014 - Clause-9 of the Madhya Pradesh Ayurvigyan Vishwavidyalay (Eligibility and Enrolment of Students for Under Graduate Courses) Ordinance, 2014 is independent to other clauses of the Ordinance. Clause – 5 to 8 of the said Ordinance deals with admission of students and relating to supply of certified list of such admitted students whereas Clause-9 independently deals with “enrolment”. Thus, contention of petitioner Full Judgment
Naresh vs. State of MP
Durgesh Singh Bhadauria vs. State of MP
Pankaj Karoriya Vs. The State of M.P. and others
M.P. Bus Operator Association Vs. State of M.P.
Law laid down - 1. Administrative Order – source of power / enabling provision is not shown/reflected in the order – the enabling provision can be brought to the notice of the Court by filing reply. If such reply is filed, that does not mean that a new reason is assigned by filing reply. Non-mentioning or wrong mentioning of enabling provision will not make the order vulnerable if otherwise power of authority can be traced from the relevant statute. 2. Disaster Management Full Judgment
Sachin Pathak Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Law laid down - Granting reservation to a woman is a special provision of reservation and would be implemented in the manner in which a horizontal reservation is implemented. The concept of migration from one category to another on the basis of merit may hold good in vertical reservation, but in horizontal reservation the same is not applicable. Full Judgment
ANKIT PATEL Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Law laid down:- Writ Appeal under Section 2(1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 assailing the order passed by the writ court dismissing the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking benefit of discount/exemption to the extent of 90% on the motor vehicle tax penalty in terms of Notification dated 02.08.2019 issued by the Transport Department, Govt. of M.P. under Section 21(1) of the M.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1991 – Held Full Judgment
Munnalal and Jagdish Vs. State of M.P.
Law laid down - (1) Prosecutrix in a rape case – conviction can be based only on the basis of solitary evidence of prosecutrix but such witness should be of “sterling quality”. Citation relied upon - Krishna Kumar Malik Vs. State of Haryana [(2011) 7 SCC 130] & Rai Sandeep @ Deepu Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2012) 8 SCC 21]. (2) While deciding rape case, the Court must also evaluate the impact of such insinuation on a person Full Judgment
Rajendra Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Ors
Law laid down:- 1. The power of confiscation is not available to be exercised by the Collector in cases of illegal transportation of sand registered under the 2019 Sand Rules. 2. The power of confiscation in cases of illegal transportation of sand registered under 2019 Sand Rules, cannot be borrowed from the repealed 1996 Rules, 2006 Rules or 2018 Sand Rules. 3. The expression “Transgress” found in repealing Clause in Rule 27 of 2019 Sand Rules, defined and interpreted to mean that to Full Judgment
Abhishek Chouhan s/o Kailash Chouhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - 1. It is held that, in majority of the cases of rape, the defence of the accused is that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and in most of the cases the accused gets the benefit of doubt also, but in the considered opinion of this Court, barring some exceptions, India are a conservative society, it has not yet reached such level (advance or lower) of civilization where unmarried girls, regardless of their religion, indulge in carnal Full Judgment
Radheshyam vs. Kamla Devi & Others
Law laid down - (1) Under Section 112 of Indian Evidence Act birth during marriage, is conclusive proof of legitimacy, therefore bars DNA testing but when blood relation of siblings is being challenged, there shall be no bar under Section 112 of Indian Evidence Act. Full Judgment
Raghuram @ Raghoram vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - (1) Dying Declaration recorded by Doctor – The wife of appellant was burnt 100% and she was conscious and oriented but her condition was grim. It was natural for Doctor to undertake the task of recording dying declaration himself in view of precarious condition..... Para 26 Citation relied upon – Abdul Majid Abdul Rehman, AIR 1976 SC 1782. (2) Appellant's subsequent conduct relevant under Section 8 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Para 30. Full Judgment
Smt. Brijesh Shrivastava Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and others
Arun Singh Chouhan Vs. State of MP & Ors.
Law laid down - Article 226 of the Constitution – Writ of Quo Warranto - Can be issued to test the validity of appointment to a public office. The said writ cannot be issued to examine the posting or working of an officer to particular place. Writ of Quo Warranto – Necessary party - The person against whom writ is prayed for is a necessary party. Public Interest Litigation – Conduct of petitioner - A practising Advocate has chosen not to answer the Full Judgment