Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 72 (0.64 seconds)

Abdul Rajjak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 April, 2019

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that on the applicant The High Court of Madhya Pradesh M.Cr.C.No.15094/2019 (Abdul Rajjak Vs. State of M.P. ) 2 depositing a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) (under protest) before the trial Court, the applicant Abdul Rajjak, shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant shall abide by the conditions as enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. and in the event of breach of condition of bail, the trial Court will be competent to take coercive action against the applicant. It is further directed that the amount so deposited shall be kept in the form of FDR for a period of 3 years before the trial Court and shall be subject to the final outcome of the trial.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Veerchand vs Rural And Urban Development Department on 18 April, 2018

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset has drawn the sh attention of this Court towards the judgment delivered in the case of e Abdul Rajjak Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2007(2) M.P.H.T. 400 ad and her contention is that in light of the aforesaid judgment even if an Pr alternative remedy is available, present petition is maintainable. She has also argued that the petitioner was absent on certain occasions in a hy the meeting of mayor-in-council and he was absent on account of the fact that he was required to attend a marriage as well as Court cases ad and inspite of the aforesaid case, he has been removed as a Councillor M and the learned Collector has gone to the extent of debarring him to contest election for a period of 10 years.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next