Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Prahlad Lodhi on 9 July, 2021

Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

Bench: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

                                                                  01

                The High Court of Madhya Pradesh
                       MCRC 18747 of 2020
            ( State of MP vs. Prahlad Lodhi and Ors.)
Gwalior, Dtd. 09/07/2021
       Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General
for applicant/State.


Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:

      This application has been filed by the State under Section

378(3) of Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment

dated 14/02/2020 passed by the       Sessions Judge, Bhind, in S.T.

No.09/2017 acquitting the respondents from the charges under

Sections 307/34, 307 & 506 of IPC.

Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 05/11/2016 complainant Abhinendra Singh had come to the house of his relative Virendra Singh at Village Goli ka pura, Police Station Nayagaon, and after taking dinner, he was sleeping at the platform. At about 12-01 in the night three persons after catching hold of him committed Marpeet with him and inflicted knife blow on his neck, as a result of which blood started oozing out. On raising hue and cry by the complainant, his relatives Virendra Singh, Guddi Bai and Rita came on the spot and rescued him. Thereafter, he asked Virendra Singh as to who are those persons, then Virendra Singh informed him that he is Prahlad Singh and he (Prahlad Singh) inflicted knife blow on him and accused Parmal Singh and Guddu Singh also helped Prahlad Singh. Virendra Singh was having enmity with these accused persons, and therefore, 02 they committed Marpeet with the complainant. At about 06:00 in the morning complainant Abhinendra lodged report against all three accused persons at Police Station, Nayagaon, on which Crime No.87/2016 for the offence under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC was registered. Complainant was sent for medical examination. On medical examination, one incised wound was found near the neck and according to the doctor, this injury was dangerous to life. Therefore, offence under Section 307 of IPC was added. Accused persons were arrested, knife was recovered from the possession of accused Prahlad Singh and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

According to the statement of complainant Abhinendra (PW-

3), on the date of incident at about 12:01 am, when he was sleeping in the house of his relative at Village Goli Ka Pura, then accused Guddu, Parimal and Prahlad came and started committing Marpeet with him. Accused Guddu and Parimal caught hold of his hands and accused Prahlad inflicted knife blow. When he cried for help, his mother-in- law Guddi Devi and Rita and Virendra came there and rescued him. Thereafter, accused persons left the place by threatening the complainant .

Witness on the spot Virendra Singh (PW-1) also supported the version of Abhinenda Singh. He stated in his deposition that in the night of 05/11/2016 at about12-01 complainant Abhinendra Singh was sleeping inside the room and he was sleeping on the roof. On hearing cries of complainant Abhinendra, he went there and saw that 03 three accused Prahlad Singh, Parimal Singh and Guddu Singh caught hold of him and accused Prahlad inflicted knife blow on the neck of complainant. Other accused persons also gave blows of legs and fists. Evidence of aforesaid witnesses is supported by medical evidence.

Heard learned counsel for the State through video conferencing and perused the record.

Looking to the evidence of the aforesaid witnesses, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is sufficient ground to allow the application for leave to appeal. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted.

M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.

Office is directed to register memo of appeal appended with this application as Criminal Appeal.

Subject to registration of the appeal in compliance of the aforesaid direction, learned counsel for the State is heard on the question of admission of the appeal.

Admit.

Let bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) each be issued against the respondents for their appearance before the Principal Registrar of this Court on a date to be fixed by the office.

                         (Sheel Nagu)                     (Deepak Kumar Agarwal)
                            Judge                                    Judge
    ms/-

MADHU
SOODAN
PRASAD
2021.07.14
19:44:19 -07'00'