The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Preetam Mirdha
2023 Latest Caselaw 14265 MP

                                                     1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT GWALIOR
                                                   BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
                                           ON THE 29 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                       MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 28238 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                          STATION THANA GOHAD DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                            .....APPLICANT
                          (BY SHRI GIRDHARI SINGH CHAUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    PREETAM MIRDHA S/O RAMSWAROOP MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

                          2.    JASRATH MIRDHA S/O RAMSWAROOP MIRDH,
                                AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

                          3.    SIRNAM MIRDHA S/O DHANLAL MIRDHA, AGED
                                ABOUT 60 YEARS

                          4.    BALVEER MIRDHA S/O SHIVCHARNA MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

                          5.    RANVEER MIRDHA S/O DEEVAN SINGH MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

                          6.    SURAJ SINGH MIRDH S/O LAYAKRAM SINGH
                                MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

                          7.    SHRIKRISHAN MIRDHA S/O DHANIRAM         @
                                DHANLAL MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

                          8.    HEM SINGH MIRDHA S/O AMAR SINGH MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

                          9.    BALWANT MIRDHA S/O DEEVAN SINGH MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 29-Aug-23
5:44:25 PM
                                                     2
                          10.   DHARMENDRA MIRDHA S/O JASWANT MIRDHA,
                                AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS

                          11.   RAJVEER @ RAJU MIRDHA S/O LAXMINARAYAN
                                MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

                          12.   BALKRISHAN    MIRDHA    S/O              GANESHRAM
                                MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

                          13.   LAXMINARAYAN MIRDHA S/O DEEVAN SINGH
                                MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

                          14.   JABAR SINGH JATAV S/O UTTAM SINGH JATAV,
                                AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

                          15.   TILAK SINGH MIRDHA S/O AMAR SINGH
                                MIRDHA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
                                PIPROLI KA PURA, THANA GOHAD, DISTRICT
                                BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS


                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

This application under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. seeking leave of the Court to file criminal appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 11.12.2021 passed in Special Sessions Case No.186/2015, whereby the Trial Court has acquitted the respondents from the charge for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 353/149, 398/149, 332/149 and 307/149 of IPC r/w Sections 11 and 13 of MPDVPK Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant, taking exception to the judgment of acquittal, submits that the Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence on record in right perspective and discredited the evidence of material witnesses, leading to acquittal of respondents/accused.

3. Having perused the judgment of acquittal and considering the Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 29-Aug-23 5:44:25 PM

submissions advanced, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, prima facie this application for leave to appeal deserves to be and is, accordingly, allowed.

4. Registry is directed to register the accompanying criminal appeal.

5. Heard on the question of admission.

6. The appeal is admitted for hearing.

7. Record of the Trial Court has already been received.

8. Let bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each be issued against the respondents for securing their presence before this Court on a date to be fixed by the Office.

9. The appeal be listed accordingly.

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE (alok)

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 29-Aug-23 5:44:25 PM