Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 August, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-6463-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6374 of 2024
(NARSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
CRA/6463/2024
(SANWARIYA & ANOTHER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 25-08-2025
Appellant - Narsingh S/o Jemal by Shri Nilesh J. Dave - Advocate in
Criminal Appeal No.6374 of 2024.
Appellant No.1 - Sanwariya S/o Ranaji and appellant No.2 - Babu S/o
Rana Ji by Shri (Dr.) Umesh Manshore - Advocate in Criminal Appeal
No.6463 of 2024.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Bhuwan Gautam -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on IA No.14127 of 2024, first application under Section 430 (1)
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 389 (1) of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973) filed on behalf of appellant - Narsingh S/o
Jamal (in Criminal Appeal No.6374 of 2024) for grant of bail and suspension
of remaining jail sentence.
Heard on IA No.8612 of 2024 , first application under Section 430 (1)
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 389 (1) of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973) filed on behalf of appellant No.1 - Sanwariya S/o
Ranaji and appellant No.2 - Babu S/o Ranaji (in Criminal Appeal No.6463 of
2024) for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.04.2024
passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Sardarpur District Dhar
2 CRA-6463-2024
(MP) in Session Trial No.42 of 2023, the present appellants stand convicted
under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (herein after
referred to as the IPC) and they have been respectively sentenced to undergo
life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- and rigorous imprisonment for a
period of seven years with fine of Rs.1,000/- along with default stipulations;
as well as appellant Narsingh has also been convicted under Section 25 (1-B)
(b) of Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of two years with fine of Rs.1,000/-.
Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 13.02.2023 deceased
Rakesh had gone to take pills and thereafter he did not come. Complainant,
his father (Dhamsingh) has lodged First Information Report (FIR) of the
incident; and on next day in the morning, his younger son Mukesh told him
that body of the deceased Rakesh was lying inside the canal. He went to the
spot and found the dead body of the deceased Rakesh. The incident was
reported to the police station where Merg No.08 of 2023 was registered and
statements of the witnesses were recorded. During inquiry, it had surfaced
that co-accused Sanwariya has given an amount of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten
thousand only) to the deceased Rakesh and due to his inability to return the
money, he was threatened with dire consequences. Thereafter, at Police
Station Sardarpur, District Dhar (MP) Crime No.77 of 2023 was registered
for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with
Section 34 of the IPC and also under Section 25 (1-B) (b) of Arms Act,
1959.
Learned counsels appearing for the appellants, while taking exception
3 CRA-6463-2024
to this impugned judgment, submit that the appellants have been falsely
implicated in this case. It is submitted that the judgment is bad in law, as the
conviction has been recorded and sentence has been passed irrespective of
the fact that there is no legal evidence was available on record. No reliable
ocular evidence is available and the chain of circumstances is also not
complete. In support of their contentions, FIR as well as statements of Jhitra
(PW-3) and Dr. Nitin Joshi (PW-4) have also been relied upon. The
appellants were suffering incarceration from the date of their arrest i.e.
17.02.2023 and thereafter, from the date of judgment i.e. 30.04.2024 they are
languishing in jail, meaning thereby, they have completed more than 02
years in custody. Hence, prayer for release of the appellants on bail and
grant of suspension of jail sentence has been made.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent / State, while supporting the judgment impugned, submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellants. Learned counsel has vehemently opposed the
prayer on the ground that the judgment is based on due appreciation of
evidence available on record. Learned counsel for the respondent - State has
also referred to statements of Jhitra (PW-3) and Dr. Nitin Joshi (PW-4) (para
9), Query Report Exhibit P-10 and FSL Report. He has also submitted that
in FSL report, sword recovered has been found with human blood, therefore,
urges the Court for dismissal of the interlocutory applications.
Heard and considered the rival submissions raised at Bar; and perused
4 CRA-6463-2024
the record.
From perusal of statement of Jhitra (PW-3) along with FSL report with
regard to sword, which has been found with human blood and other evidence
on record along with the fact that there was enmity of appellant Sawariya
with the deceased Rakesh on the ground of money lent to him as well as FSL
report wherein stone and sword Article 'C' and Article 'D' recovered from the
spot and from co-accused Narsingh found with human blood, we are of the
considered view that no case for grant of suspension of jail sentence is made
out.
Accordingly, IA No.14127 of 2024 and IA No.8612 of 2024
are dismissed.
IA No.14126 of 2024 , an application for urgent hearing filed in
Criminal Appeal No.6374 of 2024, also stands disposed off.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
rcp
