Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 October, 2025
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29363
1 CRA-1453-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 8 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1453 of 2017
NARENDRA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Rajendra Sharma - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Rajesh Joshi - GA for the State.
JUDGMENT
This criminal appeal under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure is preferred being aggrieved by order dated 12.07.2017 in ST
No.234/2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain whereby the
appellants have been convicted under sections 452, 324/34 (two counts) of
the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year under section 452 of the IPC
and 1 year for each offence under section 324/34 of the IPC respectively
with default stipulation of 1 month SI.
2. The appellant was prosecuted under section 452, 307/34 (two
counts) and 506(Part-II) of the IPC for committing the murder of Sachin
(PW-1) and Arun (PW-2) after committing house tresspass on 11.10.2011 at
9:45 a.m. at Vrindavan Dham Colony Ujjain regarding which a crime
no.79/2011 was registered within the jurisdiction of P.S.-Neelganga, District-
Ujjain (M.P.)
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29363
2 CRA-1453-2017
3. The appellants abjured the guilt and prosecution examined as many
as 8 witnesses. No witness was examined in defense.
4. Appreciating the evidence the trial court has acquitted the appellants
from charges under section 307/34 (two counts) and 506 (Part-II) of the IPC
but convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned in the para-1 of the
judgment.
5. Challenging the conviction and sentence this appeal has been
preferred but now the counsel for the appellants are pressing for
consideration of sentence in the light of compromise filed between the
parties through IA No.12746/2025 and the same has duly been verified by
the Principal Registrar of this Court on 24.09.2025 and submitted that
appellant Narendra has served 12 days incarceration and rest of the
appellants have served 7 days of incarceration. It is on record that appellants
have no criminal antecedents and both the parties are family members and
dispute arose due to parental property. In such circumstances, no purpose
would be served if appellants be sent back to custody. The benefit of
Probation of Offenders Act would be given to the appellants, therefore, in
the light of Mukesh vs. State of M.P - 2016 (3) MPWN 274, Lakhanlal @
Lakhan Singh vs. State of M.P - 2019 (2) JLJ 457, and considering the nature
of offence and circumstances of the case and accused being first offender it is
a fit case where the benefits of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act,
1958 can be extended to appellant-Narendra, Deepak, Vikas and Mohanlal.
6. Therefore, instead of directing the appellants/accused at once to
undergo remaining term of imprisonment, it is directed that they shall be
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29363
3 CRA-1453-2017
released under the provision of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act,
1958 on probation of good conduct for a period of three years subject to his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Thousand) each to the effect that they shall keep peace and be of good
behaviour during the said period of three years and shall appear to receive
sentence when called upon by the Court.
8. In view of the aforesaid, criminal appeal is partly allowed and
disposed off.
9. Record of the trial court be remitted back.
C.C. as per rules.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
ajit
