Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rohit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 November, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 CRA-4399-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 4399 of 2025
(ROHIT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 13-11-2025
Appellant by Shri Bharat Sharma - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Surendra Kumar
Gupta - Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Advocate General .
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the case from the trial Court has already been received.
The present appeal appears to be arguable, hence admitted for final
hearing.
Also heard on IA No.6057 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 - Rohit S/o
Sundarlal for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.03.2025
passed by learned Third Additional Sessions Judge Indore, District Indore
(MP) in Session Trial No.721 of 2023, the present appellant stands convicted
under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 341 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (herein after referred to as the IPC) and sentenced respectively to
undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and simple imprisonment
for a period of one month along with default stipulation.
As per the prosecution case, on 16.08.2023 informant / complainant
2 CRA-4399-2025
Dhirendra Panchal (PW-1) along with his friend Atul Jain (deceased) were
going by his Fortuner Car. At about 09:00 PM, when they were going to
their house residence situated in Dwarkapuri, he was driving car and Atul
Jain was sitting on the side seat. At about 09:30 PM from Chandan Nagar
side, two persons (appellant) riding on the scooter came from the opposite
side, therefore, suddenly brake of the car was applied and after that, the
appellant riding on scooter came in front of the Car. Both of the scooter
riders / persons got forcibly alighted Atul Jain from the Car and thereafter
co-accused Ayush S/o Jagdish taking out a big / large knife from his pocket
stabbed the deceased, who ultimately succumbed to the injuries. The present
appellant also facilitated the assault by catching hold of the deceased. First
Information Report (FIR) was registered on Crime No.872 of 2023 for
commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 341 read with
Section 34 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits the appellant has not
assaulted the deceased. He is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
the case with the aid of Section 34 of IPC. No case against him for offence
under Section 302 of IPC is made out, as he has not assaulted the
deceased. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant was on bail for
a period of 83 days during trial and never misused the liberty granted to him.
After pronouncement of the judgment, he was taken was into the custody.
This is an appeal of 2025 and there is no likelihood of final hearing of the
same in near future. The appellant has fair chances of success in this appeal,
hence learned counsel prays for suspension of remaining jail sentence of the
3 CRA-4399-2025
present appellant and grant of bail.
Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent / State
has opposed the prayer on the ground that blood has been found on the
clothes of the appellant and DNA is also matched, therefore, the allegation
that he caught hold of the deceased while stabbed by the co-accused Ayush.
Learned counsel referring to paragraphs No.68 to 74 of the impugned
judgment submits that the appellant along with co-accused Ayush has been
duly identified in Test Identification Parade as assailants. Learned counsel
further invites attention of this Court towards paragraphs No.111 and 112 of
the impugned judgment wherein it has been specifically mentioned that DNA
obtained from the blood stained clothes of the appellant has matched with
the DNA of the deceased. In this regard, he has also invited attention of this
Court towards DNA report Exhibit P/61. It is also submitted that no fault has
been committed by the learned trial Court in convicting and sentencing the
appellant with the aid of Section 34 of the IPC. Therefore, learned counsel
prays for dismissal of the suspension application.
Heard and considered the rival submissions raised at bar and perused
the record.
In the aforesaid factual matrix where the prosecution case is not
supported by Dhirendra Panchal (PW-1) and Dhirandra Kharve (PW-2), but
DNA report Exhibit P/61 fully supports the prosecution case that the
appellant was present on the spot and has facilitated the assault on the
deceased. It is also found that when presence of the appellant on the spot is
beyond doubt, blood has also been found on the clothes of the appellant and
4 CRA-4399-2025
no explanation therefor has been offered by the appellant. In such
circumstances, in considered view of this Court, no case for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail in favour of the appellant is made out.
Accordingly, IA No.6057 of 2025 is rejected.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
rcp
