Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 232 to 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 266Nominal Index:Vijay Singh Gour v Union 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 232X v Indira Gandhi National Tribal University 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 233Raju v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 234AS v DK 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 235I v HK 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 236APS v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 237Virju v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 238Ms Siddiqua Begum Khan v Union of India 2025 LiveLaw...
Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 232 to 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 266
Nominal Index:
- Vijay Singh Gour v Union 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 232
- X v Indira Gandhi National Tribal University 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 233
- Raju v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 234
- AS v DK 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 235
- I v HK 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 236
- APS v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 237
- Virju v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 238
- Ms Siddiqua Begum Khan v Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 239
- State of Madhya Pradesh v Hridyesh Dubey 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 240
- Shankar Prasad Gupta v Lovkesh Singh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 241
- Ramaavatar v Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 242
- MPPSC v Anand Yadav 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 243
- Vivek v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 244
- Branch Manager, United Insurance v Maneesh Kumar Singrore 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 245
- Badam Batham v Dinesh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 246
- New Insurance Company v Sukraniya 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 247
- Tushar v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 248
- Devisingh v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 249
- Rafiq Khan v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 250
- Raju Dhurvey v Union 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 251
- Sitarani v Dal Singh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 252
- Shyama Verma v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 253
- Sonu v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 254
- Vaishali Chaturvedi v State of Madhya Pradesh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 255
- Sawan Bohra v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 256
- SC v State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 257
- Abdul Majid v Union 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 258
- AD v PS 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 259
- Ojas Construction through its Partner Rachna Pathak vs. The State 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 260
- PS v OS 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 261
- Pragyansh Tak v Union 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 262
- Neeraj Kewat v State of Madhya Pradesh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 263
- Rajpal Kataria v State of Madhya Pradesh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 264
- State v Shashikant Jogi 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 265
- Mahesh Garg v State of Madhya Pradesh 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 266
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the Railway's failure to prevent ticketless and unauthorised persons from boarding a train amounts to contributory negligence, rendering it liable to compensate the dependents of a bona fide passenger who died due to overcrowding.
Case Title: Vijay Singh Gour v Union [MA-3232-2011]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 232
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside the termination of a professor from the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University accused of sexually harassing and exploiting a female student, after noting that the relationship between the two was going on prior to her admission in 2021.
Quashing the charges of sexual harassment, the court directed his reinstatement into service "forthwith". It however said that he would remain under suspension till fresh order is passed as to charge pertaining to leaking of question paper to the student.
Case Title: X v Indira Gandhi National Tribal University [WP No. 10864-2023]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 233
The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed an FIR against two traders accused of cheating farmers in Rajgarh District, observing that the investigative agency was apparently swayed by the plight of the farmers rather than proving a prima facie case for the offences alleged.
Case Title: Raju v State [Misc Criminal Case No. 49157 of 2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 234
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted a divorce to a husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, observing that mutual trust in a marital relationship is like a golden thread that gets impaired when one spouse makes unfounded and defamatory allegations against another.
Case Title: AS v DK [FA-58-2020]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 235
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has expressed surprise and shock at a Family Court order declaring divorce of a Muslim woman from her husband without framing issues and recording the evidence.
Case Title: I v HK [FA-1389-2023]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 236
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted bail to a man accused of raping, extorting, and criminally intimidating an elected Chairperson of the Municipality using obscene videos and photos, observing that the parties were well acquainted with each other.
Case Title: APS v State [MCRC-44293-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 237
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Tuesday (November 4), granted anticipatory bail to a man booked in an FIR for allegedly hunting and keeping the body parts of wild animals–including a peacock and a hare, without valid permission or documentation.
Case Title: Virju v State [MCRC-50364-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 238
'Film Is Fiction': MP High Court Rejects Plea By Shah Bano's Daughter Against Release Of Haq Movie
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed Shah Bano's daughter's plea against release of Haq movie, observing that as per the disclaimer the film is fictional, adaptation of a book 'Bano: Bharat Ki Beti' and inspired by the 1985 landmark Supreme Court judgment hence some amount of leeway is permissible.
The court said that the same does not amount to false portrayal of the petitioner's mother and the movie does not claim to be a true story of any person.
Case title: Ms Siddiqua Begum Khan v Union of India [Writ Petition 42708 of 2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 239
The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the State after refusing to condone a delay of over 400 days, observing that the State was not serious towards the lethargic and hostile attitude of their own officers.
The court observed that, despite repeated orders from the court, the department heads had failed to take any action against the erring officers.
Case Title: State of Madhya Pradesh v Hridyesh Dubey [WA-2510-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 240
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the security deposit of ₹250 required under Rule 19 (2) of the MP Municipality Election Petition Rules can be filed on the same day as the presentation of a revision at the filing window. In doing so, the court clarified that this would be sufficient compliance with Rule 19 and would not lead to the dismissal of the revision.
Case Title: Shankar Prasad Gupta v Lovkesh Singh [2025:MPHC-JBP:52815]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 241
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday (November 10) held that the Railways is liable to pay compensation even in deaths caused while unauthorized track crossing, if the Railways had failed to implement sufficient measures to prevent such unauthorized access to tracks.
In the present case, the bench noted that the deceased Rajesh, who was 3 years old, came onto the Railway tracks and to save him, two females also came onto the track and all three were run over by the train.
Case Title: Ramaavatar v Union of India [MA-655-2017]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 242
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed an order of the Single Bench, which set aside the opinion of the expert committee appointed by the State to assess the disputed questions in the MPPSC (MP Public Service Commission) State Service Preliminary Examination conducted in December 2023.
In doing so, the division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Pradeep Mittal observed that the courts must refrain from examining the opinion of the expert body formed by the examiner and accept their opinion.
Case Title: MPPSC v Anand Yadav [WA 1232 of 2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 243
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Tuesday (November 11), held that the presence of injury is not an essential ingredient for making out an offence of attempt to murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code/ Section 109(1) of BNS.
The court further clarified that any action is done with an intention or knowledge that this action would cause death, then the assailant would be guilty of attempt to murder.
Case Title: Vivek v State [CRR-4878-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 244
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that an owner negligently allowing or permitting a minor to drive the motor vehicle without a valid driving license leads to a fundamental breach of the insurance policy.
In doing so, the bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi emphasized that it is the solemn duty of the elders to ensure that the minors are restrained from venturing into paths not yet meant for their age, particularly the act of driving a vehicle, which demands both maturity and lawful permission.
Case Title: Branch Manager, United Insurance v Maneesh Kumar Singrore [MA 376 of 2007]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 245
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted compensation towards loss of consortium to a man, for the death of his wife, despite the fact that the couple had been living separately.
The court, citing the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd v Satinder Kaur [(2021) 11 SCC 780], reiterated that the principle of consortium applies to spousal, parental and filial consortium and applies even in cases where the relationship was subsisting only legally.
Case Title: Badam Batham v Dinesh [MA-806-2022]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 246
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that earth moving machines like road rollers, excavators, or cranes, if duly registered with the Transport Department under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and have permission for normal road use, qualify the definition of 'motor vehicle'.
The bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi further held that such machines will then make the insurance company liable for accidents caused, irrespective of the fact whether the accident occurred on the road or in an enclosed space like mine.
Case Title: New Insurance Company v Sukraniya [MA 3597 of 2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 247
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that an externment order under MP Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, cannot be passed mechanically as it casts serious restrictions on the fundamental rights and personal liberty of any person.
In doing so, the division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf set aside the externment order, noting lack of material showing any immediate engagement of the offender in the commission of the offence.
Case Title: Tushar v State [Writ Appeal 1035 of 2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 248
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Friday (November 14), dismissed the bail application of a man accused of illegal hunting in Son Chidiya Sanctuary, Ghatigaon, observing that offences involving wildlife poaching have grave implications for wildlife preservation and ecological balance and must, therefore, be addressed sternly.
Case Title: Devisingh v State [MCRC-50970-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 249
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Monday (17 November), granted anticipatory bail to News Reporter Rafiq Khan, who is accused of editing and manipulating a video that went viral on Tej India YouTube channel, purportedly showing a Head Constable of Ratlam receiving a bribe from an autorikshaw driver.
Case Title: Rafiq Khan v State [MCRC-46585-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 250
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has emphasized that every passenger, irrespective of the class in which they are travelling, is entitled to equal standards of safety, care and vigilance from the Railway Administration.
In doing so, the bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi held the Railway liable for failing to ensure safe travelling conditions after a passenger lost both his legs due to falling from an overcrowded train.
Case Title: Raju Dhurvey v Union [MA-648-2017]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 251
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reiterated that an order dismissing an application for want of prosecution is not directly appealable and that the correct remedy would be to seek restoration of the application under Order IX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC.
Case Title: Sitarani v Dal Singh [MA-2469-2014]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 252
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed an administrative order that denied seniority and regularization to a daily rated employee, observing that the authorities acted in an unreasonable and discriminatory manner, contrary to the constitutional mandates of equality (Article 14) and equal opportunity in public employment (Article 16).
Case Title: Shyama Verma v State [WP-5855-2018]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 253
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Tuesday (November 18), held that jewellery seized from a man accused of theft, with prima facie verified bills, cannot be kept in the custody of the police indefinitely in anticipation that the unidentified complainant would come forward to claim rightful possession.
Case Title: Sonu v State [MCRC-48689-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 254
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that vacancies reserved for persons with disabilities, which had been identified as far back as 2019 but were advertised only in 2023, would be treated as backlog vacancies.
Case Title: Vaishali Chaturvedi v State of Madhya Pradesh [WP 19248 of 2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 255
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Wednesday (November 19), held that the amendment introduced in the MP Medical Education Admission Rules, 2018, which barred students who have completed their MBBS from institutions outside Madhya Pradesh from seeking admission to post-graduate medical courses in the private colleges in the State, was unconstitutional.
Case Title: Sawan Bohra v State [WP no 38169 of 2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 256
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Tuesday (November 18), dismissed a habeas corpus petition by maternal uncle of a Hindu woman, observing that she was a major, was not in wrongful confinement and was living with respondent no 4 (a muslim man) out of her own free will.
Case Title: SC v State [WP-43434-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 257
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday (November 20), granted an opportunity of hearing to Abdul Majid in his petition challenging the notice issued by the Cantonment Board Office for the removal of illegal encroachment over certain parts of his residential house.
For context, the disputed property is the ancestral home of Hammad Ahmed, father of Jawad Ahmed Siddiqui, founder of Al-Falah University & chairman of Al-Falah Group.
Case Title: Abdul Majid v Union [WP-45707-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 258
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in an appeal filed by a husband challenging the Family Court's dismissal of his divorce petition on grounds of cruelty and desertion, has observed that for the ground of desertion to apply, the intention to permanently abandon the marital relationship must be established.
Case Title: AD v PS [FA-1360-2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 259
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed writ petition by a builder seeking reimbursement or refund of differential 6% GST on account of increase in rate (from 12% to 18%) on government works contract w.e.f. July 18, 2022.
Case Name: Ojas Construction through its Partner Rachna Pathak vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh [Writ Petition No. 39844 of 2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 260
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in an appeal filed by a wife challenging the Family Court's order denying her divorce, observed that if one spouse opposes divorce despite there being no possibility of cohabitation, such conduct of deriving satisfaction from the continued distress and tension of the other party can itself amount to cruelty.
Case Title: PS v OS [FA-789-2022]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 261
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the Laxmi Bai National Institute of Physical Education to grant admission to a student with Type 1 diabetes in the B.P.Ed course, noting that his exclusion was arbitrary and discriminatory.
The division bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Pushpendra Yadav further emphasised that the right to pursue education cannot be hindered or forfeited due to a disability.
Case Title: Pragyansh Tak v Union [Writ Petition 32896 of 2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 262
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the marriage of a deceased employee's son does not disentitle him from receiving family pension under the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, until he turns 25 years old or starts earning or dies whichever is earlier.
Case Title: Neeraj Kewat v State of Madhya Pradesh [writ petition 10766 of 2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 263
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by a distributor of Coldrif cough syrup, challenging the sealing of his shop along with the cancellation of his drug license, observing the subject case to be 'the most shocking case in medical history'.
The bench observed that the appellant had an efficacious remedy of appealing before the State Government under the Drug Rules, 1945.
The case pertained to the death of as many as 30 children by alleged consumption of a cold syrup named Coldrif. The deaths started happening in August.
Case Title: Rajpal Kataria v State of Madhya Pradesh [WA-3259-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 264
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Friday (November 28), dismissed an appeal filed by the State challenging the conviction granted to the accused, observing that the State had mechanically prepared the appeal without checking the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
Case Title: State v Shashikant Jogi [CRA-6751-2023]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 265
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Friday (November 28), dismissed a public interest litigation challenging the approval of the AMRUT 2 project for fresh water supply, noting that the incomplete implementation of AMRUT 1 or the potential financial burden on the exchequer cannot justify preventing the State from formulating a new scheme for providing adequate drinking water.
Case Title: Mahesh Garg v State of Madhya Pradesh [WP-38893-2025]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 266