Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravi Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 April, 2025
Author: G. S. Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:7836
1 WP-12110-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 4 th OF APRIL, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 12110 of 2025
RAVI TOMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Shiv Pratap Singh Kushwah - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Ravindra Dixit- Government Advocate for the State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed
seeking the following reliefs:-
"7.1 यह क, यािचकाकता क यािचका वीकार क जाकर रे पोडट
मांक-2 व 3 को आदे िशत कया जावे क यािचकाकता एवं करण म
उसके प रवार के अ य सा य का सुर ा के साथ वचारण यायालय
के सम कथन कराया जावे।
7.2 यह क, माननीय यायालय ारा जो भी अनुतोष / सहायता दलाया
जाना उिचत समझा जावे उसके िलये यािचकाकता को दान क जावे।"
2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that sister of petitioner had
committed suicide on account of cruelty or was murdered and accordingly, FIR
was lodged in Crime No.40/2024 and at present Sessions Trial No.161/2024 is
pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Jaura, District Morena. It
is submitted that when petitioner went to Trial Court for recording of his
evidence, then Public Prosecutor told him that today his evidence could not be
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:7836
2 WP-12110-2025
recorded and he should come on later date. Thereafter, petitioner again went to
Trial Court on 10/03/2025 for recording of his evidence Nawab Singh, Tahsildar
Singh as well as two other persons pressurized the petitioner to compromise the
matter otherwise they also extended a threat that he would be killed. As the
petitioner got afraid of threat extended by Nawab Singh, Tahsildar Singh and
other two persons, therefore, he could not appear before the Trial Court for
recording of his evidence. Petitioner has also sent a written complaint to the
Superintendent of Police, Morena on 27/03/2025 but no action has been taken
and accordingly, it is prayed that petitioner may be granted protection so that
petitioner may give his evidence fearlessly.
3. Per contra, the petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for State.
However, in the light of judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of
Mahender Chawla and Others Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2019)
14 SCC 615, it is admitted that the Supreme Court has formulated a witness
protection scheme and ensured that full protection shall be granted to petitioner
and other important prosecution witnesses so that they can depose fearlessly
before the Trial Court.
4. Considered the submissions made by counsel for parties.
5. The Supreme Court in the case of Mahender Chawla (supra) has held as
under:-
"36. We, accordingly, direct that:
36.1. This Court has given its imprimatur to the Scheme prepared
by Respondent 1 which is approved hereby. It comes into effect
forthwith.
36.2. The Union of India as well as the States and the Union
Territories shall enforce the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 in
letter and spirit.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:7836
3 WP-12110-2025
36.3. It shall be the "law" under Articles 141/142 of the
Constitution, till the enactment of suitable parliamentary and/or
State legislations on the subject.
36.4. In line with the aforesaid provisions contained in the
Scheme, in all the district courts in India, Vulnerable Witness
Deposition Complexes shall be set up by the States and Union
Territories. This should be achieved within a period of one year
i.e. by the end of the year 2019. The Central Government should
also support this endeavour of the States/Union Territories by
helping them financially and otherwise."
6. Thus, it is the primary duty of prosecution to give protection to
prosecution witnesses.
7. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that the case is fixed for
recording of his evidence on 08/04/2025. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of
with the following directions:-
(1) The Superintendent of Police, Morena shall ensure that petitioner and
other important prosecution witnesses are taken to the Court under police
protection and shall ensure that nobody can approach nearer to witnesses in order
to tutor or pressurize them not to depose.
(2) The Public Prosecutor of concerned case shall ensure that the evidence
of petitioner and other prosecution witnesses, who will be present on 08/04/2025
or who would appear on the next dates, are examined without any adjournment.
(3) The Trial Court is also directed to examine the evidence of prosecution
witnesses including the petitioner on the day which will be fixed for said
purposes.
(4) It is further directed that in case if accused persons creates any hurdle in
recording of evidence, then the Trial Court must record the examination-in-chief
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:7836
4 WP-12110-2025
of witnesses and shall make every endeavor not to succumb to the pressure tack-
ticks for deferment of cross-examination.
8. With aforesaid observation, the petition is finally disposed of.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
PjS/-
PRINCEE BARAIYA
2025.04.07 10:23:30 +05'30'
