Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dara @ Dhara Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 October, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-12788-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 12788 of 2024
(DARA @ DHARA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 30-10-2025
Shri Ashish Joshi - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri H.S.Rathore - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Per : Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on I.A.No.10607/2025, first application under Section 430 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of
the appellant no.1- Dara @ Dhara Singh S/o Rumal Singh.
The appellant stands convicted under Sections 302, 323/149, 323, 148, 201
of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-, 3
months R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/-, 3 months R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/-, 6
months R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/-, 2 years R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/- with usual
default stipulation.
As per prosecution case, complainant/informer Krishna Makwane (PW-1)
along with Arjun (PW-3) marked their presence before the Police Station
Dhamnod and lodged report on 15.12.2022 to the effect that he alongwith
members of his family gone to the attend the marriage ceremony of Lokesh son of
his uncle in the village Dhal. At about 4 P.M. marriage ceremony was going on.
Some persons were recording a video from the mobile of the bridegroom.
Appellant Dhara Singh and Mukesh were taking beer sitting in the shop of
Vishram. Apprehending that video is being recorded about taking of their beer,
they hurled filthy abuses and when objected, appellant Dhara Singh dealt blow on
2 CRA-12788-2024
head of Sohan Makwane (now deceased) with wooden stick which caused
bleeding injury. Appellant Mukesh gave blow on the head of Hiralal with wooden
stick and when the persons who had come to attend the marriage ceremony
intervened, they also were assaulted. Arjun also got injured and all the injured
persons were taken to Manpur Government Hospital for treatment. Since Sohan
and Hiralal had sustained grievous injuries, they were referred for further
treatment to Indore. On the report of the complainant Krishna Makwane (PW-1)
vide Crime No.1038/2022 police registered offence under Sections 294, 323,
506/34 of IPC against the accused. When injured Sohan on the next day of the
incident passed away, offence under Sections 302, 302/149 and 307 of IPC were
added after investigation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this impugned
judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this matter. He is suffering incarceration since 18.12.2022. The trial Court has not
appreciated the evidence in its right perspective. There are material contradictions
and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from
surmises and conjectures and has been passed ignoring serious infirmities and
anomalies. The incident occurred suddenly without any premeditation. There was
no intention to kill or to cause grievous injuries. To buttress his submissions he
has referred to the statements of witnesses PW-1 to PW-6 and described them as
interested witnesses of the same family and relations. He further submits that
appellant has fair chances of success in appeal. The appeal being of the year 2024
is not likely to be heard finally in near future. Hence, under such circumstances
prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Sounding contra note , learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
3 CRA-12788-2024
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail,
regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved against the
present appellant. He further submits that there is no infirmity in the impugned
judgment which is based on ocular evidence of the witnesses PW-1 to PW-6.
They cannot be treated as interested witnesses as their presence is natural. Some of
them are injured witnesses. The appellant without any provocation, has assaulted
the deceased and chosen his head to assault by way of wooden stick knowing that
it would prove fatal, therefore no leniency is required to be shown to the
appellant. The appellant has been convicted by well reasoned judgment and
sentenced accordingly hence no case is made out for suspension of sentence. On
these submissions, learned counsel prays for dismissal of application for
suspension of sentence.
Looking to the vehement opposition on behalf of the respondent/State, at
this juncture, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to
withdraw I.A.No.10607/2025.
Permission granted.
Accordingly, I.A.No.10607/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
RJ
