[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramlakhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
1 MCRC-56878-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 10th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56878 of 2025
RAMLAKHAN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Arshad Ali M. Haque - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Satendra Singh Sikarwar- PP for the State.
Shri Shyam Prakash Jain-Advocate for the respondents No. 5 to 7.
ORDER
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure seeking a direction for fair investigation and also for issuance of
appropriate directions to the police authorities to file an additional challan by
incorporating offence under Section 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (equivalent to Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code) in connection
with Crime No. 0002/2025 registered at Police Station Chinoni, District
Morena against respondent No.5 to 8 for offences punishable under Sections
115, 296, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner lodged an FIR on
01.01.2025 at about 11:30 AM stating that when he along with his nephew
Dharmendra Jatav and other relatives was going from his house towards
Kailaras, the respondent No.5 to 8 ambushed them near the house of Atar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
2 MCRC-56878-2025
Singh Jatav. The respondents started abusing the petitioner and thereafter
assaulted him by means of danda, fists and kicks. It is further alleged that
during the said incident respondent Brajesh Jatav and Vijay Jatav inflicted
blows by danda as a result of which the petitioner sustained injuries on his
body including injury on the finger of his left hand which subsequently
resulted in fracture. On account of the assault, the petitioner started crying
and hearing the commotion nearby persons gathered at the spot and
intervened in the matter including Dharmendra Jatav and Gajraj Jatav.
Thereafter the accused persons also extended threats to the petitioner and
warned him not to lodge any report against them and threatened him with
dire consequences in case the FIR was lodged. Despite such intimidation, the
petitioner reached Police Station Chinoni and lodged the report on the basis
of which Crime No.2/2025 was registered for offences punishable under
Sections 115, 296, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was sent
for medical examination on 01.01.2025 by the concerned police officer to the
Community Health Centre, Kailaras. The requisition sent by the SHO
mentioned injuries including pain in the fingers of the left hand and injury on
the back. The petitioner was thereafter referred to District Hospital Morena
where he remained admitted and was discharged after about five days.
Subsequently, the petitioner again suffered pain in the finger and was
admitted in the hospital from 16.01.2025 to 18.01.2025 for treatment. It is
submitted that after completion of investigation the police filed challan
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
3 MCRC-56878-2025
before the Court of JMFC, Joura on 29.06.2025 in which the documents such
as FIR, statements of witnesses, MLC, X-ray report, naksha-moka and other
documents were filed. However, the X-ray report indicating fracture of the
index finger of the left hand was not included in the challan. It is further
submitted that when the petitioner obtained certified copy of the challan on
09.10.2025 in connection with the trial pending before the Court of JMFC,
Joura in Criminal Case No.468/2025 (RCT), he found that the X-ray report
showing fracture injury was not filed along with the charge-sheet.
Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner thereafter sought
information under the Right to Information Act by moving an application on
23.09.2025 for obtaining the injury report, but the same was not supplied by
the concerned authority. Subsequently another RTI application was moved
before the Civil Surgeon and Superintendent, District Hospital Morena who
supplied information on 06.10.2025 along with attendance sheet and medical
remarks indicating injury to the index finger of the petitioner. It is contended
that the said medical documents clearly indicate that the petitioner sustained
fracture injury which falls within the category of grievous hurt. However,
despite availability of such material, the Investigating Officer deliberately
did not add the offence under Section 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
(corresponding to Section 325 IPC) and filed the challan only for minor
offences. The petitioner made several representations before the higher police
authorities including the Superintendent of Police requesting them to take
action against the Investigating Officer and also to add Section 117 BNS by
filing additional challan, however no action has been taken. The
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
4 MCRC-56878-2025
Investigating Officer intentionally suppressed the X-ray report and fracture
injury due to pressure of respondent No.5 to 8 and therefore the investigation
conducted in the case is not fair and proper. On the aforesaid grounds, he
prayed that appropriate directions be issued to the police authorities to
conduct fair investigation and to submit additional challan by incorporating
Section 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita against respondent No.5 to 8.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed
for its dismissal.
Learned counsel for respondent No.5 to 7 also opposed the petition
and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the
competent court and the trial is pending before the Court of Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Joura. It is submitted that the petitioner has an
efficacious alternative remedy to approach the trial court by filing
appropriate application and therefore this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
is not maintainable.
Heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the entire material
available on record with due care.
From perusal of the record, this Court finds that the grievance of the
petitioner is that the injury sustained by him was a fracture injury which
amounts to grievous hurt and therefore offence under Section 117 of the
BNS ought to have been added by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner
has also placed reliance upon certain medical documents including injury
report and discharge ticket to substantiate his contention.
Prima facie, the material placed on record indicates that the petitioner
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
5 MCRC-56878-2025
had sustained injury on the index finger of his left hand and certain medical
documents have also been produced to show treatment and hospitalization of
the petitioner. Thus, at this stage it appears that a prima facie grievance has
been raised by the petitioner regarding the nature of injury.
However, it is not disputed that after completion of investigation the
police have already filed charge-sheet before the competent court and the
criminal case is presently pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Joura.
Once the charge-sheet has been filed before the trial court, the matter
falls within the domain of the trial court and ordinarily this Court in exercise
of inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. would not issue directions
to the investigating agency to alter the penal sections or to file additional
challan.
At the same time, it is well settled that the trial court is not bound by
the opinion of the police with regard to the offences made out from the
material collected during investigation. The trial court is competent to
examine the material available on record and if the evidence or documents
disclose commission of any other offence, appropriate orders can be passed
in accordance with law.
The inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are
required to be exercised sparingly and only to prevent abuse of the process
of the Court or to secure the ends of justice as held by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal , 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and Madhu
Limaye v. State of Maharashtra , (1977) 4 SCC 551. Once the charge-sheet
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
6 MCRC-56878-2025
has been filed, the trial court is fully empowered under Section 216 Cr.P.C.
to alter or add charges at any stage before pronouncement of judgment. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kantilal Chandulal Mehta v. State of
Maharashtra, AIR 1969 SC 53 has held that the court is not bound by the
opinion of the investigating agency regarding the sections to be applied.
Therefore, the petitioner has an efficacious remedy before the trial court to
bring the medical documents on record and seek appropriate orders.
Therefore, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court is of the view that the most appropriate remedy available to the
petitioner would be to approach the trial court by filing an appropriate
application along with the relevant medical documents including the MLC,
injury report, X-ray report and discharge ticket.
In case such an application is filed, the Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Joura shall consider the said application in accordance with law and while
doing so shall take into consideration the medical documents including the
MLC indicating injury to the index finger of the petitioner as well as the
discharge ticket and other material produced by the petitioner and thereafter
pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the present petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file an
appropriate application before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Joura along with relevant medical documents. In the event such an
application is filed, the JMFC shall consider the same in accordance with law
and pass a reasoned order after taking into account the MLC, injury report,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8322
7 MCRC-56878-2025
discharge ticket and other relevant material placed on record.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
Vishal
