Anand @ Tota vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 19904 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anand @ Tota vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 November, 2023

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

                                                      1
                            IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT GWALIOR
                                                    BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                          ON THE 28 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                        MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 35632 of 2019

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    ANAND @ TOTA S/O SHRI RAGHUVIR SINGH,
                                 AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: KHETI
                                 GRAM AND PS DEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    MOHKAM S/O SHRI RAGHUVEER SINGH, AGED
                                 ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
                                 GRAM THANA DEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    BHAIDAYAL SINGH SIKARWAR S/O SHRI
                                 KRISHANPAL SINGH SIKARWAR, AGED ABOUT 36
                                 YEAR S, OCCUPATION: LABOUR GRAM THANA
                                 DEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    CHAINA @ CHAIN SINGH S/O SHRI RAJENDRA
                                 SINGH SIKARWAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
                                 GRAM THANA DEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    BHARAT S/O SHRI MOHKAM SINGH, AGED
                                 ABOUT 20 YEARS, GRAM THANA DEVGARH
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           6.    LOVE PRATAP @ KURTI S/O SHRI MOHKAM
                                 SINGH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, GRAM THANA
                                 DEVGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                            .....PETITIONERS
                           (NONE )

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
                                 POLICE STATION PS DEVGARH (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    RAMNIVAS VYAS S/O RAMRATAN VYAS, AGED
                                 ABOUT 51 YEARS, GRAM VINDWA PS DEVGARH,
                                 JOURA, MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETU
SHASHANK
Signing time: 11/30/2023
5:40:24 PM
                                                               2
                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                           (SHRI PRABHAKAR KUSHWAH - PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE AND
                           SHRI V.D. SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2-
                           COMPLAINANT)

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

The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

"अतः माननीय यायालय से िनवेदन है िक आवेदकगण क ओर से तुत यािचका वीकार कर अधीन थ यायालय के ी सुधीर िम ा ारा करण कमांक 03/19 म िदनांक 18.06.2019 को पा रत आदेश को अपा त कर अधीन थ यायालय को िनदिशत िकया जावे िक वह सदर करण म आवेदकगण ारा िदनांक 26.10.2018 एवं 27.10.2018 के रोजनामचे क ित अिभयोजन सदर करण म तुत कर आवेदकगण को उसक ित द एवं उपरो विणत सा ीय के पूव अनुसंधान अ धकारी राकेश गोयल के कथन करण क वा तिवक थित को सामने लाने के लये कराये जाने के आदेश यायिहत म दान करने क कृपा कर।"

At the outset, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant had taken this Court to the judgment of this Court to the matter of Ashok Kumar Jain vs Central Bureau Of Investigation reported in ILR (2011) MP 2629, also referred to by the Trial Court wherein it has been observed that the stage of invoking the provisions of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. for the accused would arise at the time of his defence and since at present evidence of prosecution witnesses are going on, learned trial Court has rightly rejected the application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. preferred by petitioner/accused.

After hearing the learned counsel for the complainant, this Court doesn't find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment as legal position in this regard is very settled that the stage of invoking the provision of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. would arise to an accused only at the stage of his defence, which is yet to come, therefore, the present petition is devoid of any substance.

Accordingly, the present petition is hereby dismissed.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu