Madhya Pradesh High Court
N Kumar Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27927
1 CRR-2005-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 27 th OF JUNE, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2005 of 2025
N KUMAR VERMA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Pradeep Singh Chouhan - Advocate for applicants.
Shri Santosh Yadav - Government Advocate for State.
ORDER
With the consent of the parties, heard the matter finally at motion hearing
stage.
This revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Bhartiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 26.04.2025 passed by Additional Sessions
Judge, Chaurai, District Chhindwara (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No.02/2024
arising out of judgment dated 06.12.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Chaurai, District-Chhindwara (M.P.) in R.C.T. No.400576/2016 affirming
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court
whereby the applicants has been convicted under Section 325/34 of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years with fine of Rs.1,000/- (each) with default
stipulations.
2. The prosecution story before the trial Court was that on 12.07.2016, the
injured Ajay @ Ajju Verma (PW-1) was passing in front of the house of the
applicants. Applicants started abusing him and after threatening to life assaulted
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27927
2 CRR-2005-2025
him. The victim suffered injuries on both the legs, hands, back and face. Gopal
(PW-2) saw the incident and reached on the spot and lodged the FIR before the
Police Station - Chaurai, District Chhindwara and on that basis Crime
No.464/2016 was registered and the injured went to hospital. After FIR, medical
examination was conducted on 23.07.2016. Fracture was found in the right ulna
bone, charge sheet was submitted before the trial Court as well as Appellate Court
convicted the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 325 read with
Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced as stated above.
3. Learned counsel for applicants has submitted that prosecution witness
Gopal (PW-2) has not supported the prosecution case and has stated clearly that at
the time of incident he was in his house and the distance between the house and
the spot is 1 - 1.5 km. Injured Ajay @ Ajju is his friend but he had not seen any
incident. Ajay @ Ajju in para-5 of his cross examination has admitted that there
was no quarrel with N. Kumar and there was no dispute with Vicky and has also
submitted that medical examination was conducted on 23.07.2016 after 11 days of
the incident. Dr. Shikhar Surana (PW-6) has stated that X-Ray was not done in his
presence and he had not done the X-Ray examination of injured. Investigating
Officer Mahendra Singh Baghel (PW-7) has also admitted that after the incident,
the victim was examined after 15 days and on that basis it is submitted that the
prosecution has utterly failed to prove his case but trial Court as well as Appellate
Court has not considered these aspects and convicted the applicants, hence, it is
clearly establish that the applicants are innocent.
4. Learned counsel for State has supported the judgment and stated that the
prosecution has proved his case beyond reasonable doubt.
5. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27927
3 CRR-2005-2025
6. Ajay Verma @ Ajju (PW-1), injured, in examination-in-chief has clearly
stated that he was passing from the house of the applicants, Vicky called him and
N. Kumar started abusing him. N. Kmuar had caught hold him and rest of the
accused persons had assaulted him. Ramesh assaulted him by brick and Vicky
assaulted him by iron rod and as a result, he suffered the injuries on both the legs,
waist and there was a fracture in the right hand. Gopal (PW-2) intervened and
saved him.
7. In the cross-examination, that was being done on the point that there was
any previous dispute or not and in that context, he had admitted that there was no
dispute with Vicky and N. Kumar. It has not clearly asked that these applicants
were not involved in assaulting him.
8. Medical expert Dr. A.K. Sen (PW-5) has clearly stated that when he
examined the injured, there was a plaster in right hand and there was injuries in
the left index finger, in right and left legs and there was also injury in his back.
Duration of the injuries was 15 days, victim was advised for X-Ray, and as per the
advise of Dr. Shikhar Surana (PW-6), X-Ray was conducted by Dr. D. Moitra and
X-Ray was conducted on the right and left legs, in left fore arm and the fracture
was found in the radius bone. There was no calcification in the fractured portion.
9. Looking to these aspects, as the FIR was immediately lodged by Gopal
(PW-2) and in that it has been clearly mentioned that these applicants had
assaulted the victim in furtherance of common intention. The FIR was lodged
immediately as the injured himself went to the hospital, hence, the Police had not
sent him for MLC and it is the negligence on the part of Police Authority, hence,
only on that basis the applicant are not entitled for acquittal.
10. Looking to all these factors, trial Court as well as Appellate Court has
considered these aspects and rightly convicted the applicants, hence, no
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:27927
4 CRR-2005-2025
interference is called for in conviction but looking to the fact that applicants
namely Ramesh @ Bhuvan Verma is of 73 years old, N. Kumar is 33 years old
and Jitendra @ Vicky is 28 years old and they are in custody from the date of the
judgment of the Appellate Court i.e. 26.04.2025 and interest of justice would be
fulfilled if the jail sentence is reduced to the period already under gone and fine
amount is enhanced from Rs.10,000/- each.
11. Hence, revision is partly allowed and conviction of applicants for the
offence punishable under Section 325/34 is maintained but sentence is modified
and is limited to the period already under gone and fine amount is enhanced from
Rs.1,000/- to Rs.10,000/- and on depositing the rest of the fine amount i.e.
Rs.9,000/- by each of the applicant, if not required in any other case, applicants
shall be released forthwith.
12. With the copy of the order, record of the trial Court as well as Appellate
Court be returned back.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
DPS
