Judgments - Madhya Pradesh High Court
MUKESH KUMAR VERMA VERSUS STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS
Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd.Versus Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority And Another
Smt. Asha Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. and others
Sateele @ Ramnivas vs. State of MP
Dr. Jeevan Yadav Vs. Swapnil & Anr.
Anup Jain and two others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
M/s Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Vs. Ghyanshyam Das Dwivedi
Monika Vishwakarma v. State of M.P. and others
Smt. Saraswati Manjhi Vs. Smt. Manju Kol
Aatamdas Vs. State of M.P
Nitesh Rathore & Another v. State of M.P. & others
Prashant Kumar Nimgani vs. State of MP & Anr.
Manoj Shrivastava vs. State of MP & Anr.
SUSHIL KUMAR TRIPATHI & ANR. Vs HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.
Law Laid Down: The Court cannot be indulgent to the petitioners as there may be many other candidates whose applications might have been received after the cut-off date as against more than 1200 applications received within time. Thus, the application forms of the petitioners cannot be directed to be accepted on account of postal delay. The petitioners can seek their remedy against the postal department for delay but the High Court cannot be directed to accept the application forms received after Full Judgment
Madhav vs. State of M.P.
Law laid down - Deposition of Investigating Officer-A public servant must be presumed to act honestly and conscientiously and their evidence has to be assessed on its intrinsic worth and cannot be discarded. Plea of Private Defence- Even if an accused does not plead self defence, it is open to the court to consider such a plea if the same arises from the material on record. Common intention under Section 34 of IPC- "Common Intention" implies a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuant to the Full Judgment