Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashwin Mahadik vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 August, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-5051-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 5051 of 2024
(ASHWIN MAHADIK AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 26-08-2025
Appellant (s) by Shri Sunil Gupta - Learned Senior Advocate assisted
by Shri Laveesh Sethia - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri H.S. Rathore -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Advocate General.
Complainant / objector - Smt. Anjali W/o Late Shri Haribahadur by
Shri Vinay Puranik - Advocate.
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on IA No.3280 of 2025 , 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 - Ashwin
Mahadik S/o Ashok Mahadik for grant of bail and suspension of remaining
jail sentence.
Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.01.2024
passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas District Dewas
(MP) in Session Trial No.97 of 2021, the present appellant stands convicted
under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (herein after referred to as the IPC) and respectively sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and simple imprisonment
for a period of one month with fine of Rs.500/- along with default
stipulations.
2 CRA-5051-2024
Brief facts of the case are that complainant Anjalibai works at ICC Sari
Shop near Shiba Hotel, Dewas. On 31.01.2021, her niece - eye witness
Sarika (PW-4) came to her house. After meeting, her son Vijay (now
deceased) was going to drop Sarika at her house Hatisingh Goyal Colony by
a car. As soon as they reached to Cutting Shop, Labour Colony Chouraha,
Balgarh, Dewas, co-accused Kalu @ Madhav Meena, Ghunghara and
appellant Ashwin and Sunny blocked / obstructed their way. Kalu @
Madhav alleging that she is filing many complaints against him, started
hurling filthy abuses. Kalu @ Madhav and Sunny took out knife from their
pocket and stabbed the deceased Vijay in stomach with intention to kill him.
Appellant Ashwin and Ghunghara assaulted him with stick ( Danda) due to
which, the deceased got grievous injuries on his right leg, left hand and right
ear. When Sarika tried to intervene, she was also threatened to kill.
Complainant Anjalibai (PW-2) and Sarika (PW-4) took the deceased to M.G.
Hospital, Dewas for treatment where he was admitted. First Information
Report (FIR) with Police Station Industrial Area, Dewas, which was
registered at Crime No.103 of 2021 for commission of offences punishable
under Sections 307, 341, 294, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
During treatment, injured Vijay succumbed to his injuries, therefore, offence
under Section 302 of the IPC was added and an offence under Section 25 of
Arms Act, 1959 was also enhanced.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
learned trial Court has passed the judgment on conjectures and surmises,
ignoring the fact that fatal injury has not been caused by this appellant
3 CRA-5051-2024
Ashwin and only one injury has been found caused by some hard and blunt
object. Learned trial Court has ignored serious infirmities, contradictions
and omissions in the prosecution case. The judgment is bad in law. During
the trial, the appellant was in jail from 27.03.2021 to 21.12.2021 and
thereafter, from the date of judgment i.e. 29.01.2024 he is languishing in jail.
Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the appellant has fair
chances of success in this appeal and the appeal being of the year 2024 is not
likely to be heard finally in near future. Hence, under such
circumstances, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondent - State has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that the
judgment passed by the Court below is based on due appreciation of
evidence. More than one injury caused by hard and blunt object has been
found on the body of the deceased, due to which he succumbed to the
injuries, which was the cumulative effect of all the injuries, which were
caused by the appellant and other co-accused persons. The period of
incarceration is only two years and six months. Ample evidence is available
on record to connect the appellant from the alleged crime of murder of the
deceased Vijay. Learned trial Court has not committed any error of fact or
law. To buttress his points, he has also referred to testimony of Sarika (PW-
4), Anjalibai (PW-2), Sonu Verma (PW-1) and Jagdish Patel (PW-17) along
with postmortem report. On these premises, learned counsel prays for
dismissal of the application for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
4 CRA-5051-2024
Learned counsel appearing for the complainant - objector has also
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of suspension of jail sentence and
grant of bail to the present appellant.
Heard and considered rival submissions raised at Bar and perused the
record.
It is a case based on ocular eye witness account, which has supported
the prosecution case. Sarika (PW-4) has withstood cross-examination and
postmortem report reveals that more than one injury was caused by hard and
blunt object. The appellant has been found armed with Danda. Previous
enmity is also established.
In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court is not inclined to grant of
suspension of jail sentence and bail to the present appellant.
Accordingly, IA No.3280 of 2025 is dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
rcp
