Judgments - INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
P. Sreekumar VERSUS State of Kerala & Ors.
SRI RAMESHWAR YADAV & ORS. VERSUS TEH STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.
The State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Nandu Ahirwar
Law laid down - 1. In a case of circumstantial evidence, there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. 2. In an appeal against the order of acquittal, the Court has to be very cautious in interfering with an appeal unless there are compelling and substantial grounds to Full Judgment
Ashish @ Banti Sen Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - The evidence of injured eye-witness has great evidentiary value. Conviction can be based on the testimony of related eye-witnesses. Full Judgment
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ramesh Kumar
STATE OF M.P. Vs. Munna @ Shahnwaj
Smt. Megha Singh Sindhe Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Law Laid Down - 1. Vague, unspecific and sweeping allegations of cruelty against the sister-in-law (Nanad) who was residing elsewhere are insufficient to sustain a charge-sheet u/S. 304-B of IPC in the absence of any other cogent and compelling evidence pointing towards subjection of prosecutrix to dowry demand related cruelty. Full Judgment
Prabhulal and 3 others Vs. State of M.P.
Law Laid down - If the incident took place suddenly without any premeditation, the accused persons merely on the ground that they assaulted simultaneously cannot be held guilty for causing injury or death for sharing common intention with each other. In such circumstances, they are responsible for their individual act. Reliance is place in the case of Balu vs. State (UT of Pondicheery) {2016} 15 SCC 471. Full Judgment
Khoob Singh - V/s - The State of M.P.
Muyinat Adenike and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another
Malkhan Singh Malviya Vs. State of M.P.
Law Laid Down - (i) Even an employee not borne out of regular establishment is entitled to be afforded reasonable opportunity of being heard before a stigmatic order can be passed terminating his services. Mere issuance of show cause notice and calling of reply would not suffice without supply of adverse material used against the employee and affording him opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his defence. Full Judgment
Chatur Singh & Another Vs. State of MP
Atibal and Others Vs. State of MP
Parvez Khan Vs. The State of M.P. and others
Pushpendra Vs. Anjani Kumar Pandey
Ramnath Pav Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - It is essential for Courts to consider the mental status of accused and find out whether at the time of incident he knew what he was doing or it was wrong and contrary to law. Full Judgment