Madhya Pradesh High Court
Samrath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 September, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-14160-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 14160 of 2024
(SAMRATH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 24-09-2025
Appellant by Shri Virendra Sharma - Learned Senior Advocate assisted by
Shri Satish Yadav - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri H.S. Rathore - Government
Advocate appearing on behalf of the Advocate General.
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on IA No.20190 of 2024 , 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 - Samrath S/o Nirbhay
Ram for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.11.2024 passed
by learned Additional Judge to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Nagda
District Ujjain (MP) in Session Trial No.127 of 2020, the present appellant stands
convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (herein
after referred to as the IPC) and respectively sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and rigorous imprisonment for a period of
seven years with fine of Rs.500/- along with default stipulations.
Brief facts of the prosecution case are that Complainant - Rajubai W/o
Rameshwar, resident of Village Chhota Chirola, Police Station Khachrod, District
Ujjain (MP) on 23.07.2020 lodged a missing person report with regard to her
husband Rameshwar S/o Shankarlal Rathore that he left on 20.07.2020 at about
08:00 AM stating that he is going to recover amount lent out to Samrath S/o
2 CRA-14160-2024
Nirbhay Ram Malviya, resident of Jaora Road, Khachrod, District Ujjain (MP),
but he did not return till 23.07.2020. On this information, the matter was inquired
into and dead body of deceased Rameshwar S/o Shankarlal Rathore was found
near rivulet (Nala) of Chambal River ( Nadi). A marg under Section 174 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was registered. Statements of the witnesses
were taken and the incriminating material was sent for Forensic Science
Laboratory. It surfaced that the deceased has been murdered by the appellant and
other co-accused persons. First Information Report (FIR) was registered and
investigated.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
judgment passed by the Court below is based on conjectures and surmises. No
eye witness account is available. The case is based on circumstantial evidence.
Chain of circumstances is not complete. The judgment is bad in law. During the
trial, the appellant was in jail from 29.07.2020 to 27.11.2024 and thereafter, from
the date of judgment i.e. 27.11.2024 he is languishing in jail.
Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the appellant has fair chances
of success in this appeal and the appeal being of the year 2024 is not likely to be
heard finally in near future. Hence, under such circumstances, learned
counsel prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent -
State has vehemently opposed the prayer supporting the judgment passed by the
Court below. To bolster his submissions, he has referred to para 108 of the
judgment. He further submits that in postmortem report, stab wound has been
found on the body of the deceased and knife has been recovered from the joint
possession of Bherulal and Samrath. Co-Appellant Bherulal has taken away the
deceased and the last seen evidence is also against him, which is substantiated by
3 CRA-14160-2024
Suresh (PW-17) and Pappu Goyal (PW-18). The present appellant (Samrath) was
having motive to commit murder of the deceased, as he (the deceased) was
pressurizing him to return the money lent out to him by the deceased. It is also
submitted that SIM of the deceased has also been recovered from the possession of
Samrath. Blood stained clothes have also been recovered from Samrath. He has
offered no explanation found on his person. On these submissions, learned
counsel submits that the appellant cannot be granted benefit of suspension of jail
sentence and prays for dismissal of the suspension application.
Heard and considered rival submissions raised at Bar and perused the
record.
From perusal of the circumstantial evidence with regard to last seen, ample
evidence is available on record show that appellant was in the company of the
deceased before his death, stab wound has been found on the body of the deceased
and knife has been recovered from the joint possession of the Bherulal and
Samrath. Going through the material available on record, we are of the considered
view that no case for grant of suspension of jail sentence is made out.
Accordingly, IA No.20190 of 2024 is dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
rcp
