Madhya Pradesh High Court Weekly Round Up: May 9 To May 15, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Shyam Kumar Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh Meghna Agarwal Vs. Anurag Bagadiya and another State of Madhya Pradesh v. Golu Dr. (Mrs.) Neena V. Patel v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors Lallu @ Krishnabhhan Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others Prakash Singh and Nandita Singh v. State of MP and anr Pappu v. The state of madhya Pradesh Judgments/Orders of the Week 'Such Interference Is Highly Inappropriate': MP High Court Quashes Transfer Order Of Bureaucrat Passed At 'Insistence' Of State Minister Title: Shyam Kumar Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 140 The High Court set aside the transfer order of a bureaucrat who was being transferred at the 'insistence' of the State Minister of Urban Administration. The Court observed that although the elected representatives can always recommend the transfer of an employee, it ought to be done citing genuine and cogent reasons. It further noted that such interference by the Executive in matters of transfer was 'highly inappropriate'. 'Wife's Patience Should Not Be Treated As Weakness/ Attempt To Create False Story': MP High Court Cancels Bail Of Husband Accused Of Unnatural Sex Case Title: Meghna Agarwal Vs. Anurag Bagadiya and another Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 141 The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently set aside bail of a man, accused of committing unnatural sex with his wife. The Court observed that the ground taken by the lower court while granting anticipatory bail to the accused/husband that there was delay in disclosure of offence under Section 377 IPC on the part of the Applicant/wife was unwarranted and made in a casual manner without appreciating the surrounding circumstances. Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs Action Against Lower Court Judge for Not Considering DNA Report in POCSO Case Title: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Golu Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 142 The High Court of Madhya Pradesh recently directed action against a lower court judge for not considering a crucial medical evidence of DNA report while acquitting the accused in a POCSO case. The Court observed that despite the medical report being brought on record, the same did not find mention in the impugned judgment passed by the respective trial court judge. The division bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice D.D. Bansal was hearing the application for grant of leave to appeal moved by the State against the impugned judgment passed by the lower court, whereby the accused was acquitted of charges punishable U/S 376-(A) (B), 377 IPC, U/S 6 POCSO Act and U/S 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly raping the Prosecutrix who, at the time of the incident, was 10 years old. The Court Can Exercise Its Revisional Jurisdiction On An Intermediate Order Since It Is Not An Interlocutory Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Case Title: Dr. (Mrs.) Neena V. Patel v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 143 The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that as far as an intermediate order is concerned, the court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction since it is not an interlocutory order. Justice Anjlu Palo referred to the case of Girish Kumar Suneja v. Central Bureau of Investigation, where it was observed that there are three categories of orders that a Court can pass – final, intermediate and interlocutory. Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Breaking Statue Of Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Case title - Lallu @ Krishnabhhan Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 144 The Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) recently upheld the life sentence awarded to a man for raping a 3-year-old girl. The court noted that the accused had left an indelible mark of devastation on the mind and body of the victim. The Bench of Justice Satyendra Kumar Singh and Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed that in view of the rights and plight of the victim and her family members, the Life imprisonment awarded to the appellant is by no means severe or excessive. "Sometimes Bar Or Bench Members Unwarily Transgress Propriety Unintentionally": MP HC Expunges Remarks Against Senior Counsel Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 145 Case title - Prakash Singh and Nandita Singh v. State of MP and anr "There are moments in courts when heated exchanges do take place and though rare, it is not unheard of that either the member of the Bar or the Bench also in equal measure, unwarily transgresses the line or propriety unintentionally," the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed recently as it expunged its remarks made against a senior counsel last month. With this, the Bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan allowed a plea made by Senior Counsel Mrigendra Singh seeking the expungement of the observations made by the court in paragraphs nos.8, 9,...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Weekly Round Up: May 9 To May 15, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags