Antar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 7395 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Antar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 August, 2025

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:23868




                                                      1                         CRA-5531-2025
                               IN     THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
                                                  PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
                                            ON THE 26th OF AUGUST, 2025
                                         CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5531 of 2025
                                           ANTAR SINGH AND OTHERS
                                                     Versus
                                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           Appearance:
                                 Shri Shubham Kusumkar - Advocate for the appellants.
                                 Shri Rajendra Kumar Suryawanshi -GA appearing on behalf
                           of Advocate General.
                                 Shri Harish Chandra Tripathi -Advocate for the respondent
                           [COMP].

                                                          ORDER

This criminal appeal under section 374 of the Cr.P.C r/w

section 415 of the BNSS, 2023 is preferred being aggrieved by the judgment dated 22.05.2025 in ST No.01/24 by Ist ASJ, Badwah, district Mandleshwar whereby the appellant Antar Singh has been convicted under sections 307 and section 323 r/w section 34 of the IPC and appellant Vikas has been convicted under sections 307 r/w section 34 and 323 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo RI for

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:23868

2 CRA-5531-2025 7 years with fine of Rs.2500/-, 3 months RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation of 1 year RI and 1 month RI respectively. All the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Facts in brief are that a total 7 persons were prosecuted for attempting the murder of Ramprasad (PW/2) and causing voluntary injuries to Poonamchand (PW/1) and causing mischief in furtherance of common object of the unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons.

3. The alleged incident occurred on 26.11.2023 regarding which a crime no.665/23 was registered at PS Badwah, district

Khargone. The incident happened due to the reason that daughter of Ramprasad (PW/2) was married to the brother of appellant No.1 Antarsingh and uncle of appellant No.2. In a motor vehicle accident Pooja and her daughter died and a dispute arose regarding the final rituals of Pooja and her daughter and injuries were caused.

4. Out of 5, only appellants were convicted for attempting to murder of Ramprasad (PW/2) and causing voluntary injuries to Poonamchand (PW/1) and have been sentenced as mentioned in para-1 of the judgment.

5. Challenging the conviction and sentence, this appeal has been preferred. During the pendency of appeal, a compromise was effected between the appellants and the injured Poonamchand

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:23868

3 CRA-5531-2025 (PW/1) and Ramprasad (PW/2) and the compromise was verified on 12.08.2025.

6. On the basis of compromise, appellant Antarsingh is acquitted from the charge under section 323 r/w section 34 of the IPC and appellant Vikas is acquitted from the charge under section 323 of the IPC.

7. Section 307 of the IPC is not compoundable, hence arguments were heard.

8. Considering the testimony of Ramprasad (PW/2), Poonamchand (PW/1), Dr.Vikas Talware (PW/7), Dr.Dinesh Thakur (PW/10), Dr.Kamal Dangi (PW/16), Dr.Naresh Damesa (PW/17), SI Ajay Kumar Jha (PW/18), SI Mahesh Yadav (PW/19), the conviction of appellant Antarsingh under section 307 of the IPC and conviction of the appellant Vikas under section 307 r/w section 34 of the IPC do not call for interference, hence it is affirmed.

9. Now the compromise may be taken in to consideration for awarding sentence. Considering the cause of incident, their sentence is reduced to the period already undergone along with fine and default stipulation. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. The appellants be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

10. Supersession warrant be prepared accordingly. Copy of

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:23868

4 CRA-5531-2025 the judgment be forwarded to the trial court along with record for compliance.

(GAJENDRA SINGH) JUDGE

hk/