Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Aryan Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1020 MP

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1020 MP
Judgement Date : 2 February, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Aryan Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 February, 2026

Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
                                       1




NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255


    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

                                 AT Indore
                                  BEFORE

         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

                     ON THE 2nd OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55105 of 2025

                              ARYAN MEENA

                                    Versus

              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:


      Shri Umesh Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

      Shri Apoorv Joshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.



                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 53880 of 2025

                              ARYAN MEENA

                                    Versus

              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS




Appearance:
                                           2




NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255


         Shri Umesh Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

         Shri Apoorv Joshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

                                       ORDER

Both the petitions involve identical issues. Therefore, they were being heard and considered together.

This petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is filed feeling aggrieved by order dated 27.10.2025 passed in Cr.R. No. 126/2025 by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Distt. Ujjain whereby the order dated 08.08.2025 passed in RCT No. 1179/2025 by Shri Anurag Sharma, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Distt. Ujjain was set aside and RCT No. 1179/2025 registered on Crime No. 721/2024 at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi was directed to be committed to the Court of Sessions.

The impugned order dated 27.10.2025 is assailed in the petition on the following grounds:

(i) In Crime No. 720/2024, the incident happened on 12.10.2024 at around 8:00 in the night at Gali No. 4, Mohan Nagar Distt. Ujjain.

Sonu alias Soni and Dharmendra allegedly, assaulted the complainant and Krishna. Krishna had died due to injuries sustained in the alleged incident. P.S. Chimanganj Mandi registered FIR at Crime No. 720/2024, whereas a counter case was registered at Crime No. 721/2024 at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi wherein, the incident has allegedly occurred on 12.10.2024 at around 22:15 hours at the house

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

of complainant in Mohan Nagar, Distt. Ujjain. Thus, there was material difference between the time, place and the nature of incident.

(ii) Learned JMFC, Distt. Ujjain vide order dated 08.08.2025 passed in RCT No. 1179/2025 declined to try both the matters as cross-case. Lalita, an injured complainant, assailed the order dated 08.08.2025 by filing a criminal revision. The 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Distt. Ujjain in Cr.R. 126 of 2025 set aside the order dated 08.08.2025 and directed trial of both the cases by same Court. The impugned order is erroneous. Therefore, the impugned order dated 27.10.2025 be set aside.

This petition filed u/S 528 of BNSS, 2023 is filed feeling aggrieved by the order dated 07.10.2025 passed in Cr.R. No. 132/2025 by the 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Distt. Ujjain whereby the order dated 08.08.2025 passed in RCT No. 1179/2025 by Shri Anurag Sharma, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Distt. Ujjain was set aside and RCT No. 1179/2025 registered at Crime No. 720/2024 at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi was directed to be committed for trial to the Court of Sessions, alongwith S.T. No. 74/2025. The impugned order dated 27.10.2025 is assailed in the petition on the following grounds:

(i) In Crime No. 720/2024, the incident happened on 12.10.2024 at around 8:00 in the night at Gali No. 4, Mohan Nagar Distt. Ujjain.

Sonu alias Soni and Dharmendra allegedly, assaulted the complainant and Krishna. Krishna had died due to injuries sustained in the alleged

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

incident. P.S. Chimanganj Mandi registered FIR at Crime No. 720/2024, whereas a counter case was registered at Crime No. 721/2024 at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi wherein, the incident has allegedly occurred on 12.10.2024 at around 22:15 hours at the house of complainant in Mohan Nagar, Distt. Ujjain. Thus, there was material difference between the time, place and the nature of incident.

(ii) Learned JMFC, Distt. Ujjain vide order dated 08.08.2025 passed in RCT No. 1179/2025 declined to try both the matters as cross-case. Sonu @ Son Kumar, another injured complainant, assailed the order dated 08.08.2025 by filing a criminal revision. The 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Distt. Ujjain in Cr.R. 132 of 2025 set aside the order dated 08.08.2025 and directed committal of RCT no. 1179/2025 to the Court of Session. The impugned order is erroneous. Therefore, the impugned order dated o7.10.2025 be set aside.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the matter, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the petitions, contends that the complainant party misguided the revisional Court and filed two separate revisions assailing the same order dated 08.08.2025. The allegations contained in Crime No. 720/2024 and Crime No. 721/2024 registered at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi are substantially different with regard to the time, place and the nature of accusation. Therefore, there was no occasion to direct trial of both the cases by same Court. The petitioners would be deprived appeal before the Court of Sessions, if RCT No. 1179/2025 pending before the JMFC is committed in compliance with the

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

impugned order. It would cause serious prejudice to the petitioners. Therefore, the impugned orders deserve to be set aside.

3. Per Contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the petitions and submits that both the offences were committed during course of same incident. The place of incident in both the offence is almost similar. Therefore, the Revisional Courts committed no error in directing trial of both offences by same Court. The petition is meritless.

4. Heard both the parties and perused the record.

5. The case diary of Crime No. 720/2024 registered at P.S. Chimanganj Mandi reveals that Deepanshu S/o Amand Singh Meena reported to S.I. Priyanka of P.S. Chimanganj Mandi on 13.10.2024 at 3:15 AM that on 12.10.2024, around 10:00 in the night, he alongwith his brother Aryan and cousin Krishna were returning home after immersion of idols (visarjan). When they reached Gali No. 4 in Mohan Nagar, Sonu and Dharmendra abused them in filthy language over previous dispute. Sonu assaulted Aryan with some sharp object on his head. Sonu also assaulted Deepanshu. Dharmendra assaulted Deepanshu and Aryan with pipe. Rahul and Kuldeep rescued them. Sonu and Dharmendra threatened to kill them. On such allegations, the P.S. Chimanganj Mandi registered FIR for offence punishable u/S 115(2), 118(1), 296, 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. During investigation, Deepanshu alleged that Sonu and Dharmendra had assaulted Krishna in the incident. Krishna was forwarded for medico legal examination. He was referred for further treatment to Civil Hospital, Ujjain and later to M.Y. Hospital, Indore. After discharge from M.Y. Hospital, his family members took him to their parental house in

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

Village Pachala in Rajasthan. On 03.11.2024, Krishna was again admitted at District Hospital at Sawayi Madhopur,Rajasthan. Krishna died during treatment. The P.S. Sawayi Madhopur registered unnatural death intimation. The dead body was forwarded for post-mortem examination. The Medical Officer opined that Krishna had died due to injury caused on his head around 21 days before the post-mortem examination. Accordingly, prosecution for offence punishable u/S 103 of BNS, 2023 was further added. The final report was submitted on completion of investigation. As informed, the trial is pending at S.T. No. 74/2025 before the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain.

6. The case diary of Crime No. 721/2024 reveals that Sonu S/o Sugar Singh R/o of Gali No. 4, Mohan Nagar, Ujjain admitted at J.K. Hospital, Ujjain reported to Head Constable of P.S. Chimanganj Mandi on 13.10.2024 that on previous night i.e. 12.10.2024, around 22:15 hrs, he was at his home, Deepanshu, Aryan and Yashpal entered his house and abused him in filthy language over garba celebration. Deepanshu assaulted him with iron rod on his right hand and back. Yashpal assaulted him with knife on his head. Aryan assaulted him with kick and fist blows and iron rod. Lalita and Aniket tried to intervene. They have also sustained injuries. Accused threatened to kill them. On such allegations, P.S. Chimanganj Mandi registered FIR at Crime No. 721/2024 against Deepanshu, Aryan and Yashpal.

7. A bare perusal of both the matters shows that both the incidents happened in close proximity of time on 12.10.2024. Sonu Kushwah alleged that accused entered his home at around 22:15 hrs in the night of 12.10.2024 and abused him with regard to quarrel at garba. The FIR at Crime No.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

721/2024 shows address of Sonu as Gali No. 4, Mohan Nagar, Ujjain. Thus, both the incident happened in Gali No. 4, Mohan Nagar, Ujjain in close proximity of time over quarrel at the procession of immersion of idols(visarjan). Learned revisional Court relying on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir & Others Vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 2001 SC 826 concluded that both the matters are apparently cross-case regarding incident which happened in close proximity of 15 minutes only. Therefore, both the matter should be tried by same Court to avoid conflicting judgments and conflicting versions of same incident.

8. Different petitioners have applied for revision against same order. But both the Courts passed similar orders in revision with identical conclusions. Therefore, no prejudice is caused to any of the parties. So far as the petitioner is concerned, the right to appeal would be available to him, even if the cases are tried by the Court of Sessions. Therefore, no serious prejudice would be caused to the petitioner.

9. In view of aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Revisional Courts did not commit any apparent impropriety or manifest illegality in directing trial of both the cases by the same Court. No case is made out to invoke inherent jurisdiction.

10. Consequently, both the petitions are dismissed. A copy of this order be kept in the connected M.Cr.C. No. 53880/2025

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) SEHAR

2.5.4.20=900ec6fc757798eaeb3df7a JUDGE 32860bd3298415a4d1c2d91436213

HASEE f2568c8f27da, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE,CID - 7059964, postalCode=452007, st=Madhya Pradesh,

N serialNumber=e7dbba955b262c04b 8413251ce7fb6f0b7dba610c57f155 9c08bf6c6f5dd40d4, cn=SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2026.02.02 19:40:35 +05'30'

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3255

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter