Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dileep Singh @ Kallu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 January, 2015
Cr. A. No.
27.1.2015.
(Rajendra Mahajan)
Judge
kkc
W. P. No.3356-09.
9.1.2015.
Shri Vijay Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Rahul Jain, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents.
Heard on IA No.16093/14.
Shri Rahul Jian, Dy. Advocate General has submitted that the petitioners No.3 to 6 and other persons were not appointed in the accordance with the provisions Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha Adhiniyam, 1979.
In view of aforesaid, IA is rejected. Petition be listed for final hearing as per turn.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc W. P. No.2462-13.
5.1.2015.
Shri Shri Sanjay Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned counsel for the respondent wants four weeks time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. A. No.1599-13
5.1.2015.
Shri Sidharth Gupta, counsel for the appellant pointed out that in compliance of the direction issued for effective substituted service on the respondents, the notices have been served through paper publication and same is filed along with application IA No.17251/14.
Office to place the same on record.
List after one week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.7534-12
5.1.2015.
Shri Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondent/ State.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General is directed to seeks instructions from the Secretary of the Tribal Welfare Department/ respondent No.4 and file the reply within four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.20076-14
5.1.2015.
As prayed by the learned counsel for the petitioner list the matter on 12th of January, 2015.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.11126-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri J. K. Pillai, learned counsel for the petitioner. Respondents have not filed any reply. Let reply be filed by the respondents within six weeks. Interim relief to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2941-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri Udayan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant. This application has been filed for restoration of W. P. No. 9627/14, which was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the applicant herself and finding the same to be bonafide, the application is allowed. W. P. No.9627/14 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
In case the petitioner is still continuing in service, the interim order passed in the writ petition shall continue to be effective in the matter.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.956-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri Pushpendra Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant. Admit.
Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F. within one week.
Call for record from the Court below. List for hearing along with the record.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.14631-13.
6.1.2015.
Shri Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondents.
As a matter of last indulgence a week's time is granted to the respondents to file reply. It may be taken note of by the office of the Advocate General that in various cases pertaining to the admission in professional medical institute, the Director, Medical Education Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal has not filed reply, as a result various petitions are pending. The Office of the Advocate General is directed to communicate the concerned Department for taking steps to file reply in time.
It is made clear that if the reply is not filed by the next date then this Court may consider for taking coercive steps against the Director, Medical Education.
A copy of the Order be supplied to Shri Rahul Jain for communicating the order to the concerned Officer.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.216-12.
6.1.2015.
Shri Manish Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant. It is stated that IA No.11753/14 has been filed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. No such application is available on record.
Office to place the said application on record.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.197-09
6.1.2015.
Shri Dinesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the appellant. IA No.15270/14 has been filed for deleting the name of respondent No.1, who is said to have been expired on 10.10.2014. It is further stated that legal heirs of said respondent are already available on record.
Keeping in view the reasons, I.A. No.15270/2014 is allowed. Necessary correction in the cause title be made within a week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.14402-14
6.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General prays for time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
List after six weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.11597-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri Sanjay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents. Shri Mukesh Agrawal prays for time to file additional return to the rejoinder filed by the petitioner.
Prayer allowed.
List in the first week of February, 2015. Interim relief to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.9857-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri J. K. Jain, Learned Assistant Solicitor General has appeared for the Union of India and prays for time to seeks instruction in the matter.
Four weeks time is granted to the Union of India to file reply. List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.9858/14.
6.1.2015.
List along with W. P. No.9857/14.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2923-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri J. K. Pillai, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard on application for restoration along with an application filed for condoning the delay in filing the restoration application.
W. P. No.15627/10 was dismissed in default. Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of Officer in charge of the case and finding the same to be bonafide, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. W. P. No.15627/10, is restored to its original file subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/- to be deposited in the office of Legal Services Committee.
It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench. Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2917-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri ipin Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard on application for restoration along with an application filed for condoning the delay in filing the restoration application.
Arbitration Revision No.21/09 was dismissed due to non- compliance of common conditional order passed in the matter.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of Officer in charge of the case and finding the same to be bonafide, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. Arbitration Revision, is restored to its original file subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/- to be deposited in the office of Legal Services Committee.
It be placed along with Arbitration Revision No.19/09 for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.1877-10.
6.1.2015.
Shri S. K. Patel, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard on admission.
Revision is admitted.
It be listed along with Cr. A. No.2123/10.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.2123-10.
6.1.2015.
Shri U. K. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Punit Shroti, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted.
It be listed along with Cr. R. No.1877/10.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.1185-10.
6.1.2015.
Shri Pramod Thakre, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Punit Shroti, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State. Heard on admission.
Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within six weeks. P. F. within seven.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.1988-14.
6.1.2015.
Shri Prakash Chandra Nigam, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Punit Shroti, learned P. L. for the respondent State. Appellant is present in person. He could not remain present before the Registry of this Court on 19.12.2014. His absence is condoned. He is directed to mark his presence before the Registry of this Court on 15.6.2015 and on other further dates, as may be notified by the Registry.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.2960-14 6.1.2015.
None for the appellant.
Shri Punit Shroti, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State. Perused IA No.22388/14, an application for condonation of delay. This appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction.
Looking to the facts of the case delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
IA is disposed of accordingly.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.1622-2005.
6.1.2015.
Shri S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant. None for the respondents.
Counsel for the applicant wants to withdraw this petition. It is dismissed as withdrawn.
(S. K. Gangele) Judge kkc Conc. No. 391-14.
9.1.2015.
Service of notice on the respondent is awaited. List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc. No.1504-13.
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the respondents prays for a week's time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19739-12.
9.1.2015.
List after a week as prayed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19369-12
9.1.2015.
As prayed for on behalf of the respondent State, list after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18982-12.
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to file rejoinder in view of the return filed by the respondents.
List after six weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18561-11
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to seek instruction.
List after six weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19847-14
9.1.2015.
Shri Amalpushp Shroti, learned counsel for the petitioner. Admit.
Issue notice.
At this stage Shri Khandekar appears and take notice of the petition.
Two copies of the petition be supplied to shri Khandekar enabling him to seeks instruction and file reply within four weeks.
Notice be also issued on the question of interim relief. Reply be filed to the said relief also.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19832-14.
9.1.2015.
As prayed, list after two weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19385-14.
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted two weeks further time to file reply.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19361-14
9.1.2015.
Shri Mukesh Argawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.
Issue notice to the respondents.
As the respondents were already represented, the payment of process fee is dispensed with.
Learned Dy. Advocate General Shri Rahul Jain is directed to seek instruction in the matter.
List after two weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18648-14.
9.1.2015.
As prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, list after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.17486-14.
9.1.2015.
Admit.
Notice.
At this stage Shri J. K. Jain, appeared on behalf of the respondents. Three copies of the petition along with the annexures be supplied to him enabling him to seek instruction and file the reply.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.2029-14.
9.1.2015.
Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondent State.
As result of the petitioner has been declared, no further action is required in the matter.
The petition stands disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.2028-14.
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the respondents prays for time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.860-14.
9.1.2015.
Admit.
Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F. within one week.
Call for record from the Court below. List for hearing along with the record.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
I. T. A. No.71-14.
9.1.2015.
As praryed, list after two weeks (Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele) Judge Judge kkc W. P. No.21729-12.
9.1.2015.
Petition is admitted for hearing.
As the respondents have already appeared and have filed reply (Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele) Judge Judge kkc I. T. A. No.205-12.
9.1.2015.
List for analogous hearing along with ITA No.203/12 and 206/12.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
T. R. No.21/12.
9.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time. List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
I. T. A. No.76/14.
9.1.2015.
List after two weeks as prayed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
ITA No.146-11.
9.1.2015.
As prayed by Shri Sanjay Lal, list after a week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19288-14
9.1.2015.
Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Proceedings for assessment of the petitioner for the year 1986- 87 has been remanded back by the Appellate Board and is pending consideration before the respondent No.3, Assistant Commissioner.
Accordingly, for the present without entering into the controversy on merit and without expressing any opinion on the same, respondent No.3 is directed to hear all concern and conclude the assessment proceedings in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Needless to state that if the assessment proceedings have already been concluded, the respondent No.3 shall be free to communicate his decision to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18233-14
5.1.2015.
Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.
Considering the fact that the respondents have vide order dated 5.12.2014 allowed the petitioner to take the examination in question, consequently, the petitioner has already appeared in the examination, therefore now the respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioner and regularise the examination.
With the aforesaid observation the petition stands disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.336-14.
9.1.2015.
Shri Manoj Rajak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.
Taking note of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case the time limit fixed for compliance of the order dated 11.10.2013 is extended for further period of 45 from today.
With the aforesaid observation the petition stands disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.15841-14.
12.1.2015.
Shri Tapan Batre, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the petition.
It is dismissed as withdrawn.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2494-14.
12.1.2015.
Shri A. K. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant. This application has been filed for restoration of W. P. No. 6847/14, which has been dismissed in view of peremptory order passed on 7.5.2014.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the counsel himself and finding the reason for the default to be reasonably explained, the application is allowed. W. P. No.6847/14 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.19806-13
12.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner wants to amend the petition. He may do so, four weeks time is granted for this purpose.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
MACTR No.1-08.
12.1.2015.
This reference has been received at the instance of the assessee under Section 71 of M. P. Commercial Tax Act 1994. After considering the submission made, the following question of law is framed for consideration :
a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Board is right in confirming the levy of Entry Tax on the entry of Optic fibre cables and HDPE Ducts etc, which are merely laid beneath the ground for providing internet & Data services by the appellant to its customers and whether in absence of the same being subjected to any process, resulting into a different commercial commodity, can be said to be 'use or consumption', attracting liability to tax?
c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Appellate Board is correct in coming to the conclusion that the goods imported from outside country and entered in the State of M. P. are liable to Entry Tax and whether the interpretation of the expression 'entry of goods into a local area' made by the Appellate Board is correct in law?
e) Whether on the facts and on the circumstances of the case and having regard to the function of the HDPE Ducts and copper wires in the activity of providing internet and Date services through the optic fibre cables, whether the HDPE Ducts and copper wires can be said to constitute accessories of the optic fibre cables and be subjected to levy of Entry Tax u/s 3 (2) of the Entry Tax Act ?
f) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the present case the Appellate Board is right in confirming levy of interest u/s 26 (4) (a) & (b) of the M. P. commercial Tax Act by applying the said provision to section 3 (2) of the Entry Tax Act?
Issue notice to the respondent/department through office of the Advocate General. They may file the return in the matter.
List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.1186-02
12.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the State is granted two weeks time as a matter of last indulgence to file the status report with regard to the financial condition of the applicants, failing which matter shall be heard in the absence of such report.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.5915-2000.
12.1.2015.
Shri Dhurv Verma, appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the return filed by the respondents he wants to seek/ instruction to file rejoinder. Four weeks time is granted for this purpose.
List after four weeks along with W. P. No.6789/2000 and W. P. No.11074/2005.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No. 6789/2000.
12.1.2015.
List after four weeks along with W. P. No.5915/2000.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.11345-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents prays for time to file reply. Four weeks time is granted for this purpose.
List along with W. P. No.11341/14 after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.11341-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents prays for time to file reply. Four weeks time is granted for this purpose.
List along with W. P. No.11345/14 after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.10531-14.
13.1.2015.
In view of the reply filed by the respondents the counsel of the petitioner wants to seek instruction and to file the rejoinder, if so advised. Four weeks time is granted for the said purpose.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.22-15.
13.1.2015.
Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. This application has been filed for restoration of A. R. No.13/10, which has been dismissed in view of non-compliance of peremptory order passed by this Court on 6.1.2014. There bing some delay, IA No.107/15 has been filed.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the applicant himself and finding the same to be bonafide, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. A. R. No.13/10 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.17574-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Shailendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.
Respondents to file the reply within four weeks. List thereafter for orders.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.15820-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents prays for grant of four weeks time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
Interim relief to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18978-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents prays for grant of four weeks time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
Interim relief to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.685-14
13.1.2015.
Service of notice on the respondents is awaited. List after two weeks.
Interim order to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.673-14.
13.1.2015.
Notices sent to the respondents have been received back with the remark that they are not available at the address given. It appears that the notices could not be served on the respondents because the house was locked.
Issue fresh notice on payment of PF within a weeks. Returnable within four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.606-14.
13.1.2015.
The service of notice to the respondents is awaited. Copy of memorandum of appeal along with Annexures be served on the standing counsel appearing for the respondents and acknowledgment be filed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.13896-14
13.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for further four weeks time.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.48-15.
13.1.2015.
Smt. Shobha Menon, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rahul Choubey, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Rajesh Maindiretta, learned counsel for the respondents. This application has been filed for restoration of F. A. No.838/07, which has been dismissed for want of prosecution. There being some delay, IA No.470/15 has been filed.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the counsel himself and finding no reason to disbelieve, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. F. A. No.838/07 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2937-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri S. D. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant. This application has been filed for restoration of R. P. No.797/12, which has been dismissed for want of prosecution. There being some delay, IA No.17834/14 has been filed.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the counsel himself and finding no reason to disbelieve, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. R. P. No.797/12 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.2853-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri Awdhesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the
applicant.
This application has been filed for restoration of W. P. No.8618/11, which has been dismissed for want of prosecution.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the applicant himself and finding no reason to disbelieve, the application is allowed. W. P. No.8618/11, is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.1186-02
12.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the State prays for two weeks further time to submit the report with regard to financial status of the applicant.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.15174-14.
13.1.2015.
Shri S. Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shanshank Shekhar, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and 2.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State.
The dispute in this writ petition pertains to plying of heavy vehicles over about the load of eight tons on the roads in question which are classified as rural roads. There being serious dispute between the parties with regard to the fact as to whether such vehicles are plying on the road and there being conflicting reports available on the record we deem it appropriate to direct joint inspection of the road continuously for a period of about 10 days and thereafter submit a report to this Court.
It is accordingly directed that the Commissioner Shahdol Division shall appoint a Committee consisting of representative of Government, the Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Agency and one representative of the petitioner to conduct a joint inspection of the road for the period of about 10 days and take videograph and photograph during the inspection conducted and submit the report with this Court. The Commissioner shall also insure that preventive steps are taken for prohibiting plying of heavy vehicles on the road in question. Inspection be conducted between 2nd of February and 23rd of February or any till date as may be convenient to the parties and report be submitted.
List along with said report in the first week of March. C. C. as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.20499-14.
14.1.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner wants time to implead the step ;mother as party in the matter. Two weeks time is granted for the said purpose.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.13998/14.
14.1.2015.
List along with W. P. No.7581/2014.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.20461/14.
14.1.2015.
List for analogous hearing along with W. P. No.17186/14.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18755/14
14.1.2015.
In view of the reply filed by the respondents the counsel of the petitioner wants to seek instruction to file the rejoinder. Two weeks time is granted for the said purpose.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18283-14.
14.1.2015.
Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sunil Kherdikar, learned counsel for the respondent. It is stated by Shri Kherdikar that even though the auction notice was issued but as no bid was received, no auction proceeding took place and now this petition challenging the auction proceeding is rendered infructuous, as no bid was received in the auction that was proposed to be held.
Keeping in view the aforesaid statement made by Shri Kherdikar, we dispose of this petition as having been rendered infructuous because of the aforesaid reason.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18799-14
14.1.2015.
Shri Ajay Mishra, Senior Advocate with Shri Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for the respondent/ University.
It is stated by Shri Brajesh Choubey learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ University that as the petitioner had cleared the previous examination based on the result declared after revaluation and as the petitioner had already appeared in MBBS (Final) (Part-II) examination by virtue of the interim order passed on 28.2.2014 in W. P. No.3384/14, the University is now processing the matter for declaration of result of the petitioner. Accordingly, as undertaken by Shri Choubey, it is directed that the result of the examination in question i. e. MBBS (Final) (Part-II) undertaken by the petitioner be not declared within a period of one weeks from today.
With the aforesaid this petition is disposed of. C. C. as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.7581-14.
14.1.2015.
Shri Sanjay Agrawal and Shri Pratyush Bhatnagar learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned Advocate General with Shri Rahul Jain, learned Deputy Advocate General and Shri Akshay Sapre, learned G.A. for the respondents/ State.
Shri Vivek Tankha, Senior Advocate with Shri Shashank Shekhar, learned counsel for the respondent No.4.
This case and other connected cases are to be heard finally and they were listed for the said purpose. However, it transpires that in some of the connected cases return has not been filed by the State Government. However, Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned Advocate General points out that he shall be adopting return already filed in this case and other connected cases. However, copies of the return filed in the connected cases and being adopted be given to all the counsel appearing in each of case within a period of three days.
In case any additional affidavit is to be filed by any of the parties they are directed to do so on or before 10th of February, 2015.
As agreed by the parties, list the matter on 19th of February, 2015 under the same head.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C. No.17592-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri R. S. Rathor, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the applicant/ accused submits that statement of few witnesses have been got recorded before the trial Court and he wants to produce the copy of the same and seeks two weeks' time.
Prayer is accepted.
List after two weeks.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.17410-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Prashant Shrivas, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
As prayed by the counsel of the applicant/ accused list after two weeks.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.16877-14 16.1.2015.
Shri Pawan Gurjar, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
As prayed by the counsel of the applicant/ accused, list after two weeks.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.16001-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Sandip Koshta, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
Respondent's counsel is directed to produce the case diary along with the report of injuries of injured Maya Bai, as directed vide order dated 7.1.2015.
It be listed in the week commencing 27.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.15240-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Pawan Gurjar, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
It be produced on the next date of hearing. List in the next week.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.14927-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
As prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant, list after two weeks.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.9634-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri A. D. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
It be produced on the next date of hearing positively. If the case diary is not produced on the next date of hearing the I. O. of the concerning P. S. shall be ordered to be present personally before the Court.
List in the week commencing 27.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.347-15.
16.1.2015.
Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
It be produced on the next date of hearing. It be listed in the next week.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.314-15.
16.1.2015.
Shri P. S. Gaharwar, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
Bail application of co-accused Rajendra Singh filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure was decided by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court (Hon'ble Shri Justice Subhash Kakde) vide order dated 6.3.2014 passed by M. Cr. C. No.3414/14. Hence, it be listed before the appropriate Bench in the next week.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.20978-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri M. Shafiqullah, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Case diary is not available.
It be produced on the next date of hearing. It be listed on 21.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.20481-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Sanjay Patel, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
This is first application filed by the applicant/ accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.432/12, registered at Police Station Chorhata, District Rewa for offence under Sections 353, 332, 186, 294, 506-B, 427, 147 and 148 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant/ accused has not committed any offence, she has been falsely implicated in this case, she being lady be granted anticipatory bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant-accused has prayed for rejection of the bail application.
On perusal of the record, it is evident that a decree for eviction was passed by the Court of 6th Civil Judge, Class-II Rewa in Civil Suit No.31-A/08 and warrant for possession was issued by the Court and in compliance of said warrant bailiff of the Court arrived at the spot for delivery of the premises at that time the employee was assaulted by the applicant and co-accused.
At this stage learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw this application. Hence, application is dismissed as withdrawn.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.20368-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Z. M. Shah, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute has been resolved between the parties owning to which he wants to file a petition for compromise within seven days.
The prayer is accepted List after seven days.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.19593-14.
16.1.2015.
None for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
None appeared on behalf of the applicant/ accused, case is adjourned.
List after a week.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.19427-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri R. S. Patel, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
This first bail application filed by the applicant-accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.349/2014, registered at P. S. Themi, district Narsinghpur for offence under Sections 323, 498-A r/w Section 34 of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant being husband of the complainant has been falsely implicated in this case. There was petty dispute between the applicant and her wife Smt. Shanti Bai regarding payment of some money for treatment which was got conducted at Jabalpur owning to which the complaint was made by the complainant/ wife on the basis of false and fabricated facts stating that a T. V. and a Motorcycle were not given by the parents of the complainant and she was harassed and oppressed for demand of dowry by the applicant/ accused and his family members. Counsel further submits that there is no kind of recovery to be made from the applicant/ accused in this case. Moreover, no reason has been assigned in the case diary as to why the arrest of the applicant/ accused is required in this case. The alleged offences are punishable up to seven years imprisonment. Counsel further placing reliance upon the judgment Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 , has prayed for grant of bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant-accused have prayed for rejection of the bail application.
As per case diary the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the applicant/ accused on 26.4.2014. If the applicant/ accused is sent to the jail a compromise in the dispute would not be possible. Nonetheless there is not kind of recovery to be made from the applicant/ accused in this case.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the judgment cited by the applicant, this court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, allowing this application, it is ordered that in the event of arrest by the arresting officer or by the court, the applicant Dinesh Lodhi shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court. The applicant is directed to join the investigation immediately and fully cooperate with the investigating agency and the trial. The applicant shall abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub section (2) of Section 438 of Cr. P. C. It is further ordered that applicant/ accused shall not influence in any manner to the witnesses and threaten to the complainant. If any violation of terms and condition of bail order is found in future, his bail may be cancelled.
M. Cr. C. stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.1997-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Rahul Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
As prayed by the counsel of the respondent applicant is directed to supply him a copy of the petition as well as IAs along with the documents within seven days.
List in the week commencing 27.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.922-14 16.1.2015.
Shri S. N. Saraf, learned counsel for the appellant/ accused. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to produce the appellant Shiv Prasad Kewat within three weeks. The prayer is accepted.
Meanwhile application for condoning his absence be also filed.
Case be listed on 20.2.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.1987-13.
16.1.2015.
Shri S. B. Agnihotri, learned counsel for the appellant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1.
Shri Kamal Singh Rajput, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
Heard on the question of maintainability. The appellant/ complainant has filed this appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of sentence whereas the appeal is not maintainable. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he wants to move an application for converting this appeal into the revision and seeks two weeks time for the same. The prayer is accepted.
List along with Cr. A. No.1956-13, after two weeks.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.1956-13.
16.1.2015.
Nonel for the appellant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1..
Shri S. B. Agnihotri, learned counsel for objector/ complainant.
As per office note the appellant/ accused appeared on 14.11.2014 and his absence for 16.9.2014 was condoned and further dates for his appears has been fixed 16.2.2015. The appeal has already been admitted, hence list for final hearing in due course.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.760-13.
16.1.2015.
Appellant/accused Bablu Pasi is present in person along Shri Nagendra Singh, Adv.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Heard on IA No.6238/14, filed by the appellant for condonation of his absence on 24.3.2014.
Considering the facts stated in the application, the said IA is allowed and his absence is condoned. Appellant/ accused is directed to remain present before the Registry of this Court on 27.3.2015 and all subsequents dates which are fixed by the office in this regard till disposal of this appeal.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.2248-12.
16.1.2015.
Shri Sandip Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Appellant/ accused has not appeared before the Court. As per office note he remained absent on 15.9.2014.
As prayed by the learned counsel for the appellant two week's time is granted to produce the appellant/ accused. Meanwhile application for condonation of his absence be also filed.
List the case on 4.2.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.2154-10 16.1.2015.
Shri Atul Choudhary, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
In compliance of order dated 27.8.2014 the current status of trial be produced within two weeks and case be listed thereafter.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.17529-14.
16.1.2015.
None for the applicant/ accused, even in second round. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
Since none is appeared on behalf of the applicant, petition is dismissed for want of prosecution, as none appeared on 12.12.2014 also which indicates that the applicant has no interest in this petition.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.10-15 16.1.2015.
Shri Awdhesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Due to paucity of time matter cannot be heard. List on 20.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.2617-14 16.1.2015.
Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Due to paucity of time matter cannot be heard. List on 22.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.1941-14 16.1.2015.
Shri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Due to paucity of time matter cannot be heard. List on 21.1.2015.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.20208-14.
16.1.2015.
Shri Narendra Nikhare, learned counsel for the applicant/ accused.
Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent.
Case diary is available.
This first bail application filed by the applicant-accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.570/2014, registered at P. S. Mandideep, District Sehore for offence under Sections 294, 324, 307 and 506/34 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier case was registered under Section 294, 324 and 506/34 of IPC and the applicant/ accused was enlarged on bail by the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gauharganj vide order dated 3.9.2014 as mentioned in the order dated 25.11.2014 passed by the Court of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen in Bail Application No.765/14. Learned counsel further submits that during investigation an offence under Section 307 of IPC has been further added owning to which the applicant/ accused may be again arrested either by the Court or by the police. The learned counsel placing reliance upon the judgment in the case of Noneju Vs. State of M. P. 1995 (1) MPWN 111 has submitted that once the applicant/ accused was arrested in a crime, he shall not be re-arrested in the said crime even after a grievous offence is made out against the applicant accused. On the aforesaid ground learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant-accused has submitted that applicant/ accused has a criminal background and 33 criminal cases were registered against him owning to which the bail application filed by him be rejected.
Heard the arguments of both the parties. Indisputably the applicant/ accused was earlier enlarged on bail by the court of Judicial Magistrate as stated earlier, during investigation the offence under Section 307 has been added on the basis of medical report. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the judgment cited by the applicant, I deem it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, allowing this application, it is ordered that in the event of arrest by the arresting officer or by the court, the applicant Sagar Pal shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court. The applicant is directed to join the investigation immediately and fully cooperate with the investigating agency and the trial. The applicant shall abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub section (2) of Section 438 of Cr. P. C. M. Cr. C. stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(M.K.Mudgal) Judge kkc VATA No.12/14, 13/14, 14/14, 15/14, 16/14, 17/14, 18/14, 19/14, W. P. No.18769/14, 18771/14 and W. P. No. 18772/14 19.1.2015.
In VATA No.12/14 and other connected cases under the statutory provisions the question of law have been framed, they have to be answered that being so learned counsel for the parties pray for analogous hearing. Shri Choudhary also points out that two writ petitions on the same question are also pending. He indicated them to be W. P. No.1769/14 and W. P.1858/14.
Parties submits that pleadings in all the cases are completed. Keeping in view the interim stay granted by this court learned counsel for the revenue prays for early hearing.
Prayer is allowed.
Office to take steps for listing of the matter for final hearing under the category of Court expedited matters.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc. No.1852/14.
19.1.2015.
List along with F. A. No.214/11.e (Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele) Judge Judge kkc Conc No,1056-10.
19.1.2015.
IA No.16476/14 has been filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC. The respondent's wants to file counter affidavit. Two weeks' time for the said purpose is granted.
List after two weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.414-10
19.1.2015.
None present for the parties. Adjourned. List after six weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.296-10.
19.1.2015.
It is reported that respondent No.3 has expired. Learned
counsel prays for time to tile appropriate application to bring the legal hearing on record.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.229/10.
19.1.2015.
Appeal be listed along with following connected matters.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.39-10.
19.1.2015.
IA No.12203/14 has been filed for urgent hearing of this appeal.
The matter pertains to the year 2010. IA is rejected.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.731-13.
19.1.2015.
It is stated by the learned counsel that paper book lists has already been filed on 10.12.2014.
Office to verify and proceeding with the matter.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.3136-12
19.1.2015.
Rejoinder filed by the petitioner is taken on record. The
respondent may file the additional return, if so advice.
List after four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.1953-12
19.1.2015.
List along with W. P. No.3136-12.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.214/11.
19.1.2015.
None present for the appellant.
Shri R. P. Khare, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and 2. As none is present for the appellant the case is adjourned. List in the next week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.1852-14.
19.1.2015.
List along with W. P. No.214-11.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
ITA No.206-12.
19.1.2015.
Shri Sanjay Lal, counsel for the appellant. IA No.13464/14, has been filed seeking exemption from filing the certified copy and service certificate of the impugned order as the same has been filed in ITA No.200/12.
Application is allowed.
List it for analogous hearing along with ITA No.11/12.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.141-15.
20.1.2015.
Shri Sanjay Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. Issue notice to the respondents. P. F. within one week. Call for the report from the Collector with respect of financial status of the applicant.
List along with the report.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.12-15.
20.1.2015.
Shri Ashish Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant. Issue notice to the respondents. P. F. within a week. Returnable within four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.18359-14.
21.1.2015.
Smt. Kanak Gaharwar has filed the reply. Copy given to the counsel of the petitioner. He may seeks instruction.
Meanwhile notice be issued to the respondent No.3, 4 and 5. P. F. with three days. Returnable within four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.7157-14 & 5805-14.
21.1.2015.
It is stated by Shri Prashant Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission that he shall file the reply within the course of three days. He may do so.
In view of the aforesaid list the matter in the week commencing 9th of February, 2015.
I. R. to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.12525-14.
21.1.2015.
In view of the return filed by the respondents learned counsel for the petitioner wants time to seeks instruction. Four weeks time is granted for said purpose.
I. R. to continue.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.3973/14.
22.1.2015.
Shri Mahendra Pateria, learned counsel appearing for the Board prays for four weeks time to file reply.
Prayer allowed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.2267-14.
23.1.2015.
Due to non-availability of the Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Dy. Advocate General the prayer for adjournment is made.
List in the next week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.1810-14
23.1.2015.
List in the next week, as prayed by the counsel of the applicant.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.1756-14
23.1.2015.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Issue notice to the respondents. P. F. within one week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.883-14
23.1.2015.
List after a week, as prayed by the counsel of the parties.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.1363-14
23.1.2015.
List after a week, as prayed by the counsel of the parties.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.982-13
23.1.2015.
Admit for final hearing.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.1005-15
23.1.2015.
Issue notice.
At this stage Shri J. K. Jain, takes notice on behalf of respondent No.1/ union of India.
A copy of the petition along with annexures be supplied to shri Jain enabling him to seeks instruction and file reply within four weeks.
Shri Mohan Sausarkar, Adv. takes notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and 3.
Two copies of the petition along with annexures be supplied to shri Sausarkar enabling him to seeks instruction and file reply within four weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.989-15
23.1.2015.
Issue notice to the respondents.
P. F. within one week. Returnable within three week. The question of interim relief shall be considered on the next date of hearing.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
W. P. No.941-15
23.1.2015.
List on 28th of January, 2015 along with W. P. No.939/15, as prayed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Conc No.124-15
23.1.2015.
Issue notice to the respondent. P. F within a week.
Returnable by 16th of February, 2015.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.965-14.
23.1.2015.
Shri V. K. Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant. Issue notice on the memorandum of appeal and IA No.17766/14.
P. F. within one weeks. Returnable within six weeks. Till the next date of hearing the respondents are directed not to create any third party interest in the property in question.
C. C. as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. C. C. No.157-15.
23.1.2015.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this application has been filed for restoration of F. A. No.272/99, which has been dismissed for want of prosecution. There bing some delay, IA No.704/15 has been filed.
Keeping in view the reasons given in the application which is supported by the affidavit of the applicant himself and finding the same to be bonafide, both the applications are allowed. Condoning the delay in filing the restoration application, the restoration application itself is allowed. F. A. No.272/99 is restored to its original file. It be placed for order before an appropriate Bench.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.51-15.
23.1.2015.
Default pointed out by the office be rectified within two weeks.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.52-15.
23.1.2015.
Issue notice of IA No.1071/15.
P.F. within one week.
Call for the record of the court below. List for hearing along with the record.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C.. No.20063-14.
23.1.2015.
Issue notice on IA No.1349-15.
P. F. within one week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C. No.18475-14
23.1.2015.
I. A. No.22620/14, has been filed for seeking condonation of delay in filing this petition under Section 378 (3) of Cr. P. C. Keeping in view reasons stated in the application explaining the delay in filing the petition, IA is allowed and delay is condoned.
Call for the record.
List for admission along with the record.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C. No.15212-12.
23.1.2015.
Shri S. K. Kashyap, learned G. A. for the applicant. I. A. No.19015/14, has been filed for seeking condonation of 150 days delay in filing this petition under Section 378 (3) of Cr. P. C. Keeping in view reasons stated in the application explaining the delay in filing the petition, IA is allowed and delay is condoned.
List after one week for admission.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C. No.26294-14
23.1.2015.
Issue notice on IA No.20080/14.
P. F. within one week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
F. A. No.3646-14.
23.1.2015.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.2569-14.
23.1.2015.
None present for the appellant.
List the matter after a week.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. R. No.1885-14.
23.1.2015.
It is stated that now due to conclusion of the trial, this revision has rendered infructuous.
Revision is dismissed as rendered infructuous.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.1163-14
23.1.2015.
Issue fresh bailable warrant of Rs.10000/- against the respondents. Warrant be made returnable by 27th of March, 2015.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.962-14.
23.1.2015.
Learned counsel for appellant prays for one more time to keep present the appellant.
Appellant shall remain present on 25th of March, 2015.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.92-14.
23.1.2015.
Shri V. D. S. Chouhan, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri S. K. Kashyap, learned G. A. for the respondent. IA No.493/15 has been filed seeking condonation of non- appearance of appellant No.3 and 4, Smt. Basanti Bai and Smt. Ramsakhi. It is stated that they could not appear on 8.1.2015 due to certain bereavement in the family.
Keeping in view the aforesaid, absence of appellant No.3 and 4 on 8.1.2015 is hereby condoned.
They are present today, their presence are marked on record. Considering the fact that the appellants are ladies and it is not convenient for them to appear before this court. They are granted liberty to appear before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhatarpur. They shall appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhatarpur now on 18.8.2015 and on other dates, as may be directed by such Court.
C. C. as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.3080-13
23.1.2015.
It is stated by Shri Vikash Mishra, that the appellant does not want to press IA No.23431/14.
Taking note of aforesaid statement, the IA is dismissed as not pressed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.2543-13.
23.1.2015.
Issue fresh warrant of arrest for appearance of the accused Luvkesh Kumar Chaturvedi.
List on 24th of March, 2015 for production of the accused.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.2080-13.
23.1.2015.
Shri S. K. Kashyap, learned G. A. for the appellant. Shri Sudeep Deb, learned counsel for the respondent. IA No.22650/14, has been filed seeking condonation of non- appearance of respondent on 28.10.2014.
Keeping in view the reasons stated in the application, absence of the respondent on 28.10.2014 is hereby condoned.
Now he shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 13.7.2015.
C. C. as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.345-13
23.1.2015.
List the IA No.18643/14, for consideration after four weeks before the appropriate Bench.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
Cr. A. No.2128-12.
23.1.2015.
As prayed list after two weeks to file appropriate application indicating the fact that appellant being in custody in some other case.
(Rajendra Menon) (S. K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
kkc
M. Cr. C. No.20164-14.
27.1.2015.
Shri A. P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Ravi Shankar Dubey, learned P. L. for the non-applicant/ State.
Heard the arguments.
Perused the case diary and material on record. This is first application by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr. P. C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.501/14, Registered at P. S. Bijuri, District Anuppur against him and co- accused Naresh under Section 34 (2) of the M. P. Excise Act, 1915 (for short "the Act").
The prosecution allegations are that the applicant and co- accused persons were found in unlawful possession of 55 bulk liters of country made (Hath Bhatti ki Bani Sharab) liquor.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is in custody since 2.11.2014 and the charge sheet had been filed. It is also submitted by him that vide order dated 5.1.2015 passed in M. Cr. C. No.20760/14, this Court had granted bail to co-accused Naresh under Section 439 of the Cr. P. C. It is also submitted by him that it is first ever offence registered against the applicant under the Act. It is also submitted by him that the case is triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class and the conclusion of trial will take long time. Upon these submissions, the prayer for grant of bail is made.
Learned P. L. has opposed the bail application. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties by their counsel, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the application is allowed. It is therefore, ordered that applicant Narayan Kolbe released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen thousand only) with one solvent surety, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance on all the dates as may be fixed by it in this regard. In case of bail jump, the concerned Court will have full power to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Certified copy today.
(Rajendra Mahajan) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.20052-14.
27.1.2015.
Shri D. Chandra Mallik, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Ravi Shankar, learned P. L. for non-applicant/ State. On perusal of the file, it appears that this second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of Cr. P. C. Her earlier bail application was decided vide order dated 22.4.2014 passed in M. Cr. C. No.9995/14. Such bail application was decided by Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Gupta. His Lordship is available. Hence, Registry is directed to place the case before His Lordship in the week commencing 2.2.2015.
(Rajendra Mahajan) Judge kkc Cr. R. No.144-15.
27.1.2015.
Shri Harikant Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant Shri Alok Tapikar, learned Panel Lawyer for the non- applicant/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Having perused the impugned judgment, this revision appears to be arguable, hence the same is admitted for final hearing.
Learned Panel Lawyer has taken notice of this admission, hence no further notice is required.
Heard on I.A. No. 1306/15, which is an application for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail.
Vide impugned judgment dated 12.1.2015, passed by the Court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in criminal appeal no.361/14, Vachan Kewat Vs. State of M.P. through P. S. Panagar, District Jabalpur the applicant stands convicted under Section 324 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant had been on bail during the trial and the appeal. However, he is in jail since 12.1.2015, after passing of the impugned judgment. As such, the applicant had already suffered 15 days' imprisonment. It is also submitted by him that the applicant had deposited the fine amount. It is further submitted by him that there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in a reasonable time. Hence, the revision becomes infructous, in case the applicant would have suffered the jail sentence before hearing of it. He, therefore, prays for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant.
Learned Panel Lawyer submits that considering the short jail sentence and there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in near future, he has no objection in allowing the aforesaid I.A. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, short jail sentence and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant, therefore, the I.A. is allowed. The execution of remaining jail sentence of the applicant is hereby suspended and it is ordered that subject to depositing the fine amount, if any, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Jabalpur. He shall appear before the Registry of this court on 29.4.2015 and thereafter on all such dates, which shall not be less than the period of three months, as may be fixed by it in this regard until further orders.
Registry is directed to requisition the records of trial court as well as appellate court.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE kkc Cr. R. No.143-15 27.1.2015.
Shri Ramashankar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant Shri Alok Tapikar, learned Panel Lawyer for the non- applicant/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Having perused the impugned judgment, this revision appears to be arguable, hence the same is admitted for final hearing.
Learned Panel Lawyer has taken notice of this admission, hence no further notice is required.
Heard on I.A. No.1268/15, which is an application for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail.
Vide impugned judgment dated 16.1.2015 passed by the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in criminal appeal no.143/13, Lal Singh @ Hardayal Yadav Vs. State of M.P. through P. S. Garhimalhara District Chhatarpur, the applicant stands convicted under Section 25(1-B) (A) of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer RI for one year and fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant had been on bail during the trial and the appeal. However, he is in jail since 16.1.2015 after passing of the impugned judgment. As such, the applicant had already suffered 11 days' imprisonment. It is also submitted by him that the applicant had deposited the fine amount. It is further submitted by him that there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in a reasonable time. Hence, the revision becomes infructous, in case the applicant would have suffered the jail sentence before hearing of it. He, therefore, prays for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant.
Learned Panel Lawyer submits that considering the short jail sentence and there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in near future, he has no objection in allowing the aforesaid I.A. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, short jail sentence and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant, therefore, the I.A. is allowed. The execution of remaining jail sentence of the applicant is hereby suspended and it is ordered that subject to depositing the fine amount, if any, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Chhatarpur. He shall appear before the Registry of this court on 28.4.2015 and thereafter on all such dates, which shall not be less than the period of three months, as may be fixed by it in this regard until further orders.
Registry is directed to requisition the records of trial court as well as appellate court.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE kkc Cr. R. No.60-15 27.1.2015.
Shri R. S. Thakur, learned counsel for the applicant Shri Alok Tapikar, learned Panel Lawyer for the non- applicant/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Having perused the impugned judgment, this revision appears to be arguable, hence the same is admitted for final hearing.
Learned Panel Lawyer has taken notice of this admission, hence no further notice is required.
Heard on I.A. No.590/15, which is an application for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail.
Vide impugned judgment dated 5.1.2015 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in criminal appeal no.130/14, Tejman Singh @ Kaushal Singh and two others Vs. State of M.P. through P. S. Baikundhpur, Distric Rewa, the applicants stand convicted under Section 325 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced each of them to suffer RI for one year and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant had been on bail during the trial and the appeal. However, he is in jail since 5.1.2015 after passing of the impugned judgment. As such, the applicant had already suffered 22 days' imprisonment. It is also submitted by him that the applicant had deposited the fine amount. It is further submitted by him that there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in a reasonable time. Hence, the revision becomes infructous, in case the applicants would have suffered the jail sentence before hearing of it. He, therefore, prays for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicants.
Learned Panel Lawyer submits that considering the short jail sentence and there is no likelihood of this revision being heard in near future, he has no objection in allowing the aforesaid I.A. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, short jail sentence and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant, therefore, the I.A. is allowed. The execution of remaining jail sentence of the applicant is hereby suspended and it is ordered that subject to depositing the fine amount, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing 'each' a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twentyfy thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned. They shall appear before the Registry of this Court on 20.4.2015 and thereafter, on all such dates, which shall not be less than the period of three months, as may be fixed by it in this regard, until further orders.
Registry is directed to requisition the records of trial court as well as appellate court.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE kkc Cr. A. No.3535-15.
27.1.2015.
Smt. Sarita Chourasiya, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State. Heard on the question of admission.
Having perused the record, this appeal appears to be arguable, hence the same is admitted for final hearing.
Learned Panel Lawyer has taken notice of this admission, hence no further notice is required.
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for and is granted two weeks' time to argue IA No.594/15, which is an application under Section 389 (1) of the Cr. P. C. List the case for consideration above IA in the week commencing 9th of February, 2015.
(Rajendra Mahajan) Judge kkc Cr. A. No.2184-13 27.1.2015.
Shri R. B. Gautam, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State. Today case is listed for consideration of iA No.2354/14, which is an application under Section 389 (1) of the Cr. P. C. Vide impugned judgment the appellants stand convicted under Section 363, 376 of the IPC r/w Section 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Protection of Children from the Sexual Offences Act 2012 and sentenced each of them for various terms, the maximum being RI for ten years RI.
In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter Atul Tripathi Vs. State of U. P. 2014 (2) MPWN 147, the learned P. L. is directed to file the return/ reply of the IA on the next date of hearing.
List the case for consideration above IA in the week commencing 9th of February, 2015.
(Rajendra Mahajan) Judge kkc M. Cr. C. No.18519-14.
27.1.2015.
Shri S. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri R. S. Dubey, learned P. L. for the respondent/ State. On previous hearing dated 20.1.2015, this Court has directed to the P. L. to submit the details of the case pending against the applicant under Section 8 r/w 20 of the N. D. P. S. Act as mentioned in the impugned order dated 12.11.2014.
Today, learned counsel for the applicant submitted a copy of the charge sheet of Crime No.368/10, registered at City Kotwali, Sidhi against the applicant under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act.
Learned P. L. submits that he does not want to challenge the authenticity of the copy of charge sheet.
Arguments heard.
Perused the case diary of the present case along with the charge sheet and material available on record.
This is first application by the applicant Dilip @ Kalu under Section 439 of Cr. P. C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.838/14, registered at P.S. Kotwali, Sidhi, against him and co- accused Raju for the offence under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. Prosecution allegations are that upon the secret information the police searched a Motorcycle bearing registration No.M.P.-53- MD5955. It was being driven by the applicant and co-accused Raju was sitting upon it as pillion rider carrying a bag in his hand. When the bag was opened, 4 Kg Ganja (Cannabis) worth of Rs.8,000/- was found keeping in it unlawfully.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 7.11.2014 and the charge sheet had been filed. It is also submitted by him that the applicant does not know co-accused Raju personally. The applicant gave him lift at his request without knowing the fact that he has been carrying the Ganja in his bag. The police had falsely implicated the applicant in the matter. It is further submitted by him that the quantity of seized Ganja is much below the commercial quantity, which is 20 Kg. Upon these submissions, the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant is made.
Learned P. L. submits that in Crime No.368/10, the applicant was found in illegal possession of 500 grams Ganja, which shows that the applicant deals in Ganja. He further submits that this Court vide order dated 16.12.2014 passed in M. Cr. C. No.18444/14, had rejected the bail application of co-accused Raju under Section 439 of Cr. P. C. Upon these submissions, learned P. L. has vehemently opposed the bail application of the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties by their advocates and the registration of aforesaid case against the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant, hence, his bail application is rejected.
(Rajendra Mahajan) Judge kkc