Mukesh Chandra Vaishya vs The State Of M.P
2026 Latest Caselaw 595 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mukesh Chandra Vaishya vs The State Of M.P on 20 January, 2026

Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh

Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5252




                                                                  1                           CRR-1516-2021
                               IN      THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                          BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
                                                   ON THE 20th OF JANUARY, 2026
                                               CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1516 of 2021
                                                   MUKESH CHANDRA VAISHYA
                                                             Versus
                                                  THE STATE OF M.P AND OTHERS
                            Appearance:
                               Shri Rupanshu Agrawal - Advocate for the applicant.
                               Shri Pankaj Raj - Panel Lawyer for the State of M.P.

                                                                      ORDER

On 16.9.2021 stay has been grated against the proceeding in S.T. No.55 of 2020 by this Court for six months.

The complainant - Ramlakhan Kahar was impleaded as a party in this case.

Notice has been received back unserved.

This revision is preferred against the impugned order dated 26.3.2021 passed by 5th A.S.J., Waidhan, district Singrauli passed in S.T. No.55 of

2020 whereby charges under Section 306/34 of IPC were framed.

It is submitted that deceased committed suicide by consuming poison. It is submitted by learned Panel Lawyer for the State that as per FIR Crime No.530 of 2020 was registered. It was the allegation that Rajnish and Mukesh used to harass the deceased Vandana. Therefore she committed suicide.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that his party is on

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5252

2 CRR-1516-2021 bail.

When this court asked from learned counsel for the applicant as to what was error in framing of charge, what factual question were to be asked, what was the statements and what are the issues cannot be decided by the Revisinal Court and that can be decided after recording of evidence. It is seen that there is huge CDR running into more that 100 pages and the revisional court cannot go entry by entry in the call details. Accordingly after hearing learned counsel for the applicant this court is of the view that all the factual and legal matter have to be decided by the trial court after recording of evidence.

In a case of Captain Manjit Singh Virdi (Retd.) versus Hussain

Mohammed Shattaf & Ors. reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 462 judgment dated 18th May 2023 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under :-

"At the stage of hearing on the charges, entire evidence produced by the prosecution is to be believed and if no offence is made out, then only an accused can be discharged. Truthfulness, sufficiency and acceptability of the material produced can be done only at the stage of trial. At the stage of charge, the Court has to satisfy that a prima facie case is made out against the accused persons. Interference of the Court at that stage is required only if there is strong reasons to hold that in case the trial is allowed to proceed, the same would amount to abuse of process of the Court. (Para 11) "

Prima facie on perusal of the record it is seen that perversity is shown. Therefore after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and in the light of judgment of Apex Court delivered in the case of Captain Manjit Singh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5252

3 CRR-1516-2021 Virdi (Retd.) (supra) no ground is made out to interfere in proceeding of framing of charge.

Liberty is granted to the revisioner - accused to raise all the factual and legal grounds before the trial and any observation made by this court in this order shall not come in the way while deciding the case by the trial court and the trial court shall decide the case strictly on merits as per law.

With the aforesaid this revision is disposed of.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

bks