[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Samit @ Sumit Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 December, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
1 CRA-2247-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY
ON THE 3rd OF DECEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2247 of 2025
SAMIT @ SUMIT KOL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ram Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant Samit @ Sumit
Kol.
Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of I.A.
No.18034/2025, which is first application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to appellant Samit @ Sumil Kol.
2. Accordingly, I.A. No.1834/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.
3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the case is heard
finally.
4. This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of the judgment
dated 11.02.2025 passed in S.T. No.211/2023 by learned 7th Additional
Sessions Judge, Rewa (MP) whereby appellant has been convicted and
sentenced in the following terms:-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
2 CRA-2247-2025
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
in lieu of fine
S.I for 05
302 I.P.C. R.I. for life Rs.1,000/-
years
S.I for 09
324 I.P.C. Nil Rs.5,000/-
months
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the star
prosecution witness, Munni Kol (PW-4), is hostile.
6. It is pointed out that incident took place on 27.05.2023 at 10 o'clock
in the night and it was a sudden fight on account of intrusion of deceased
Dharmendra in the house of the appellant.
7. It is submitted that deceased Dharmendra died in July, 2023 and his
postmortem was conducted on 07.07.2023. Therefore, in view of the
evidence of the postmortem Doctor, PW-9, since no definite cause of
death is assigned by the concerned doctor, it cannot be said that appellant
is liable to be convicted under Section 302 of IPC.
8. It is submitted that none of the prosecution witnesses have
supported the prosecution case and, therefore, it's a case for acquittal.
9. Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, in
his turn, submits that Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-21) was recorded by the
deceased himself i.e. Dharmendra Kol and that Dehati Nalishi, as was
recorded by PW-14, I.O. of the case, has remained unrebutted.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
3 CRA-2247-2025
Therefore, when this Dehati Nalishi is read in terms of the provisions
contained in Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 which
provides for appreciation of evidence in cases in which statement of
relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant,
then since the statement of Dharmendra, as contained in Dehati Nalishi,
relates to cause of death, case will be covered only under Section 302 of
IPC.
10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record. Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-21) recorded by Dharmendra on
28.05.2023 at 15:45 pm as given to PW-14 clearly makes mention of the
fact that incident took place on 27.05.2023 at 10:00 pm. It further gives
vivid account of how the incident took place. It is clearly mentioned that
on 27.05.2023, he after having his dinner was sleeping in one room
when his Mami was lying in another room. For last four months he was
residing at village Puraina in the house of his Mami and was working as
a labourer. At about 10:00 pm Sumit Kol S/o Rajesh Kol came to him
and abusingly said that when he is roaming outside home for the whole
day, then why he comes back in the night every time. When Dharmendra
objected, then Sumit Kol had taken out a knife and stabbed him thrice in
his stomach, as a result of which he started bleeding. His Mami, Munni
(PW-4), came running to save him but Mami too was stabbed in the left
hand wrist, when on raising an alarm Shyamlal Kol, Bhole Kol, Baby
Kol and other persons had reached the place of the incident. Sumit Kol
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
4 CRA-2247-2025
had run away. Dharmendra was taken to hospital where he was admitted
at ICU Ward of Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, Rewa, where he was
undergoing treatment and from where he lodged report, Ex.P-21.
11. On the basis of this report, FIR (Ex.P-22) was registered under
Sections 294, 324, 307 of IPC.
12. Shyamlal Kol (PW-1) has clearly stated in his examination-in-chief
that Dharmendra is his relative so also the appellant Samit @ Sumit Kol.
He had reached the place of the incidence on hearing a call from Munni
Kol, who had shouted that Sumit had stabbed with a knife. When he
reached the house of Munni, then he found Dharmendra lying on a
takhat in a blood pool. Sumit was not there but Munni had informed him
that Sumit had given a knife blow and then in an ambulance they had
taken Dharmendra to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital for treatment.
13. Ramakant Kol (PW-2) stated that Sumit Kol is not known to him,
Dharmendra is his nephew, his treatment was carried out at Sanjay
Gandhi Hospital for 10-12 days, he was discharged from hospital, after
reaching home he survived for few days and then died. This witness is
not an eye witness. He stated that he had seen Dharmendra at Sanjay
Gandhi Hospital.
14. Pushpendra Tiwari (PW-3) is a witness of memorandum of the
appellant Sumit, as contained in Ex.P-3 and his arrest memo, Ex.P-4. He
is also witness to the seizure memo, Ex.P-2.
15. Munni Kol (PW-4) has turned hostile. She has not supported
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
5 CRA-2247-2025
prosecution case. On the contrary, in para 7 of her cross-examination,
she categorically stated that Sumit was not present at the place of the
incident.
16. Baby Adiwasi (PW-5) too was declared hostile and she has not
supported the prosecution case, so also Nirmal Rawat (PW-6) and Ravi
Kol (PW-7).
17. Dr. Vivek Kumar Patel (PW-8) had examined Munni Kol W/o
Jagdish and had found that there were incised wounds on left forearm
measuring 2x3x6x8 cm, they were simple in nature and theses injuries
were caused by hard and sharp object within 24 hours of his
examination.
18. Dr. Rizwan Khan (PW-9) had conducted postmortem on the body
of Dharmendra, he had taken note of various injuries which were
stitched on the body of the deceased Dharmendra and stated that no
definite opinion can be given in regard to cause of death, he had sealed
the viscera and had sent it for histopathology.
19. However, Pawan Singh (PW-14), ASI, proved Ex.P-20, certificate
given by the duty doctor, that deceased Dharmendra was fully conscious
and was capable of giving his statements and also Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-
21), as was recorded at the instance of Dharmendra. There are no
contradictions in his evidence in regard to medical condition of the
victim at the time of recording of Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-21).
20. When all these facts are taken into consideration, then it is evident
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62808
6 CRA-2247-2025
that, firstly, incident took place on 28.07.2023. Dharmendra succumbed
to the injuries on 06.07/07.07.2023. Dr. Rizwan Khan (PW-9) has not
given any definite opinion. Case will fall under Exception 4 to Section
300 of IPC.
21. After having said that we are conscious that use of a dangerous
weapon, like, knife, which appellant Sumit was already carrying will
point out towards his intension but cannot be said that he had knowledge
that his act may cause homicidal death and, therefore, when this aspect is
taken into consideration, then conviction of the appellant Samit @ Sumit
Kol can be converted from one under Section 302 of IPC to one under
Part-I of Section 304 of IPC and accordingly, we modify the conviction
and direct him to undergo sentence for a period of 10 years R.I. and fine
of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further S.I. for 5
years.
22. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part with above modification in
the impugned judgment.
23. Let record of the trial Court be sent back to the concerned Court.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)
JUDGE JUDGE
MTK
