Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Charan Singh on 3 October, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:50617
1 CRA-655-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 3 rd OF OCTOBER, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 655 of 2023
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Versus
CHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
G S Thakur G A appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
This leave to appeal is filed by the State being aggrieved of the
judgment dated 23.09.2022 passed by learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge,
Lakhnadon, District Seoni in S.T. No.76/2021 whereby the respondents
Charan Singh and Dhaniram have been acquitted of charges under Sections
302 and 201 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that on 15.05.2021, complainant
Pandulal had lodged a report at Police Station Kindari that his father
Rammulal had left their home in the afternoon of 14.05.2021 who attended
marriage at the place of their relative Amarlal Bhagdiya resident of village
Mohgaon. When he did not return back till 15.05.2021 then a missing person
report 15/2021 was registered. While search was going on, on the way to
village Palhera, a blue color Gamcha, a pair of shoes and blood on the road
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:50617
2 CRA-655-2023
alongwith a Danda were found. Body of Rammulal Maravi was found in the
well of Khairsingh Maravi. After dead body was taken out, identification
panchnama was prepared and then Dehati Nalishi 0/21 was registered.
3. It has come on record that on the basis of suspicion, respondents
have been impleaded as accused persons.
4. Shri G.S. Thakur, learned Government Advocate submits that there
are certain circumstances which speak for themselves and go against the
respondents. First circumstance is recovery of a knife at the instance of
Dhaniram and reply of the concerned doctor in the query report that the
injuries which were sustained by Rammulal could have been caused with
that knife. Second circumstance is that there were blood stains on the pant of
Charan Singh though he admits that no serological examination could be
conducted to find out as to whether it was a human blood or not? Thus, it is
pointed out that these two circumstances are sufficient to convict the
respondents and therefore, leave be granted and notices be issued.
5. After hearing learned Government Advocate for the State and going
through the record, Dhannulal Maravi (PW-1) is son of deceased Rammulal.
He has admitted in para-7 of his cross-examination that he is taking name of
the accused Charan Singh on account of family dispute. He further stated that
he cannot say with certainty that because of such enmity, said incident took
place.
6. Pandulal Maravi (PW-12) is another son of deceased. He has stated
in para-13 of his cross-examination that while giving his case diary statement
(Ex.D-2), he had not informed the police that there was old land dispute with
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:50617
3 CRA-655-2023
Charan Singh Maravi and Dhaniram was suspecting their father to be
involved in magic etc. Santosh Durve, SHO, Kindari (PW-13) has admitted
in para-20 of his cross-examination that FIR (Ex.P-28) was lodged on
16.05.2021 at 01.23 hours. This FIR was lodged against unknown persons.
He further admits that at the time of preparation of spot map, Pandulal,
Sanjay Kumar, Dhannulal, Vipatlal and Gangaram were present and at the
time of preparation of spot map, none of them had informed that they suspect
Charan Singh to be the accused on account of old enmity.
7. Thus, it is evident that Investigating Officer himself admits that on
16.05.2021, no suspicion was raised q u a Dhaniram. As per evidence of
Dhannulal Maravi (PW-1) and Pandulal Maravi (PW-12), they only
suspected Charan Singh to be one of the assailants but neither there is any
evidence of last seen nor any recovery is made from Charan Singh and
therefore, merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures acquittal recorded
against Charan Singh and Dhaniram cannot be faulted with as the chain of
circumstances is not complete to hold that the respondents alone were guilty
and there could not have been any other person who caused homicidal death
to the deceased. Accordingly, I.A. No.735/2023 an application for grant of
leave is dismissed.
8. Consequently, appeal also fails and is dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
HK
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:50617
4 CRA-655-2023
