Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raavi Singh Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 July, 2025
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:13898
1 WP-17611-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
WRIT PETITION No. 17611 of 2025
RAAVI SINGH TOMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
None for the petitioner.
Shri G K Agarwal Ga appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Reserved on : 2.7.2025
Pronounced on : 30/7/2025
This petition having been heard and reserved for orders, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Milind Ramesh Phadke, Judge pronounced the following:
ORDER
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:
7(1). यह क, माननीय सव च यायालय ारा अपने याय ांत लिलता कुमार बनाम उ दे श रा य म ितपा दत कया है क य द थाने का भार साधक अिधकार सं ेय अपराध म एफ.आई.आर. पंजीब नह ं करता है तो उसके व वभागीय एवं द डा मक कायवाह क जायेगी, उ याय ांत के प र े य म याथ मांक 01 व 02 को आदे िशत कया जावे क उ मामले म एफ.आई.आर. दज न करने वाले भारसाधक अिधकार के व विध अनुसार कायवाह क जावे।
7(II). यह क, व ान J.M.F.C. यायालय िभ ड ारा करण 211/2023 UNCR- (र व िसंह तोमर बनाम म. . शासन) म पा रत आदे श दनांक Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR Signing time: 31-07-2025 11:52:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:13898 2 WP-17611-2025 12.08.2024 एवं व ान पंचम अपर स यायालय िभ ड ारा Cr.R. 73/2024 र व िसंह तोमर बनाम म. . शासन म पा रत आदे श दनांक 07.05. 2025 को िनर त करते हुए उ मामले म द. .स. क धारा 156 (3) के तहत एफ.आई.आर. पंजीब कये जाने के संबंध म आदे श पा रत कया जावे।
7(III). यह क, याय हत म जो उिचत हो आदे श व िनदश पा रत कया जावे।
(2) None for the petitioner.
(3) Learned counsel for the respondent/State has argued that the merg case No.8/2023 was registered at Police Station Ater with regard to death of deceased Prayag Singh alias Bhura Tomar and inquiry was conducted and during enquiry the body of the deceased Prayag Singh alias Bhura Tomar was taken out of the river by joint rescue search of SDERF team Bhind and Gwalior. The statements of the family members and independent witnesses were recorded and from the statements it is clear that when the police arrived on the information there was chaos at the gambling den and some people ran towards the ravines and some ran towards the Kwari River, later it was found that a man drowned in the Kwari river, whose body was found in the river on 28.3.2023 and on the basis of which the report was submitted before the competent authority on 13.6.2025. Learned counsel for the respondents further argued that the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Bhind has passed the order dated 12.8.2024 by which an application under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. was dismissed and thereafter Criminal Revision No.73/2024 was filed by the petitioner, which too was dismissed and prays that the learned Trial Court has disposed of the application under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. on merits and also the revisional Court has also dismissed Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR Signing time: 31-07-2025 11:52:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:13898 3 WP-17611-2025 the same on merits and therefore, the present writ petition also deserves to be dismissed.
(4) Heard the learned counsel for the respondent/State and perused the record.
(5) From perusal of the order dated 7.5.2025 passed by the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind it is clear that after examining the investigation report called for from the police and the statements of the witnesses during the investigation, the learned trial court had found that the police constables did not go to the gambling den. The witnesses stated that the constables did not snatch money from the father of the complainant and neither did they push him into the river, nor did the constables fired from their revolver. It is clear from the orders of both the Courts below and from the perusal of the record that the evidence of the complainant and his witnesses did not support the complaint, i.e. they were not supporting the incident. After examining the evidence produced in support of the complaint, it was found that the complainant and his father were present at different places on the date of the incident. In such a situation, the statement of the complainant/revisionist that on the date of the incident, in front of him, both the police constables had pushed his father into the Kwari river and when the complainant came forward to save his father, both the constables fired at the complainant with their revolvers with the intention of killing him, is not tenable.
(6) In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned orders passed by the Court below are just and proper and are in Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR Signing time: 31-07-2025 11:52:11 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:13898 4 WP-17611-2025 accordance with law. The Court below had not committed any error in deciding the petitioner's application under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. Hence, this Court does not find any ground to interfere in the orders impugned.
(7) Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE (aspr) Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR Signing time: 31-07-2025 11:52:11