Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 556 (0.96 seconds)
Documents citing Raja Ram And Ors.Prem Singh & Anr vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 January, 1997

Ram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 January, 2019

13. On perusal of the medical report of the victim Lekhraj, it is apparent that the injuries are not caused by -( 6 )- MCRR No. 5920/2018 Ram Singh and others vs. State of MP the cutting object. It is well settled that 'lathi' is not a dangerous weapon. It is mentioned in the MLC of the injured Lekhraj that all the injuries are caused by hard and blunt object.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - R K Shrivastava - Full Document

Prem Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 September, 2020

9. ,rn~ }kjk ;g funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd izR;sd vkosndzx.k 2 ikS/kksa dk ¼ Qy nsus okys isM+ vFkok uhe@ihiy½ jksi.k djsxk rFkk mls vius vkl iMksl esa isM+ksa dh lqj{kk ds fy, ckM+ yxkus dh O;oLFkk djuh gksxh rkfd ikS/ks lqjf{kr jg ldsA vkosndx.k dk ;g drZO; gS fd u dsoy ikS/kksa dks yxk;k tk,s] cfYd mUgsa iks"k.k Hkh fn;k tk,A ^^o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gSA^^ vkosndx.k fo'ks"kr% 6&8 QhV ÅWaps ikS/ks@isM+ksa dks yxk;sxs rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djus ds fy,] vkosndx.k dks fjgk fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds Hkhrj lacaf/kr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k o`{kksas@ikS/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh QksVks çLrqr djuk gksxsaA rRi'pkr~] fopkj.k ds lekiu rd gj rhu eghus esa vkosndx.k ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k izxfr fjiksVZ çLrqr dh tk,xh A o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk drZO; gS D;ksafd i;kZoj.k {kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky; vuqikyu ds ckjs esa vkosndx.k }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks utj vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA blfy, vkosndx.k dks isM+ksa dh çxfr vkSj vkosnd }kjk vuqikyu ds HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 5 M.Cr.C.No.30235/2020 (Prem Singh & Anr. Vs. State of M.P. )
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - A Pathak - Full Document

Ram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2017

Further more, from the copies of the complaints which have been filed along with the present application, it is clear that the applicant 5 M.Cr.C.No.6107/2016 (Ram Singh v. State of M.P.) no.1 has made allegations against Chandrabhan Singh that he is trying to dispossess him from the plot which he has purchased and he is saying that he would give some other plot. Thus, it is clear that there is no allegation or report against the complainant, that he had ever tried to interfere with the peaceful possession of the applicants over the plot which was purchased by them.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 September, 2021

(v) the applicants will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the State Government as well as the local 4 M.Cr.C.No.46493/2021 (Ram Singh and another Vs. State of M.P.) administration from to time in the matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc., to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19);
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R Arya - Full Document

Ram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 September, 2019

It is the duty of the trial Court to monitor the progress of the trees because human existence is at stake because of the environmental degradation and Court cannot put a blind fold over any casualness shown by the applicant regarding compliance. Therefore, trial Court is directed to submit a report regarding progress of the trees and the compliance made by the applicant by placing a short report before this Court every quarterly (every three months), which HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 M.Cr.C. No.36156/2019 (Ram Singh Vs. State of M.P.) shall be placed under the caption "Direction" before this Court. Any default shall disentitle the applicant from benefit of bail.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A Pathak - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next