The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Hassan Khan on 16 December, 2025

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Hassan Khan on 16 December, 2025

Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68063




                                                                 1                            CRA-1194-2010
                               IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
                                                 ON THE 16th OF DECEMBER, 2025
                                                CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1194 of 2010
                                               THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           Versus
                                                       HASSAN KHAN
                            Appearance:
                               Shri Amit Sharma - Governemnt Advocate for the State of M.P.
                               Shri Shakeel Ahmed - Advocate for the respondent.

                                                              JUDGEMENT

This is an appeal against acquittal. The appeal was already admitted on 25.6.2010. Record of the trial court has been received.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is heard finally.

2. The appellant - State is aggrieved of the judgment dated 22.11.2007 passed in Criminal Case No. 2299 of 2005 (State of M.P. thorugh P.S. G.R.P. Vs. Hasan Khan) by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhindwara whereby the respondent has ben acquitted of the charges under Section 224 of IPC. He was charged with the allegation that the respondent absconded from the legal custody of the Police on 10.2.2005 between 4:30 to 4:45 PM from platform chhindwara.

3. Against aforesaid judgment criminal appeal has been filed by the State on the ground that proper appreciation of evidence has not been done and therefore due to non appreciation of evidence in its right perspective Signature Not Verified Signed by: 37a54170-d81d- 4133-9abf-4d76b62a4b17 Signing time: 17-12-2025 10:49:08 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68063 2 CRA-1194-2010 judgment of acquittal has been passed and prayer is to convict the accused

- appellant.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent support the impugned judgment.

5. Perused the statement of PW-1 - Anil, a Railway Vernder. He was selling tea and samosha on the platform. He has stated in examination-in- chief that he did not see the accused running away. He only heard that Police Personnel were talking that the accused had left the platform ( लेटफ़ॉम से िनकल गया).

6. PW-2 Santosh is another vender who has stated on the same line as stated by PW-1- Anil.

7. PW-3 Kabirdas Dhurve, A.S.I., G.R.P. has stated that a report (Ex.P-4) was prepared in relation to absconding of the accused. Therefore this is a formal witness.

8. PW-4 Bhimrao is the Constable who has stated that he is working in Police Head Quarter, Chandrapur (M.H.). He was bringing the accused - Hashan from Chandrapur Jail to Chhindwara Jail for producing him in the Chhindwara Court. After the day's work was over, he was taking back the accused to Chandrapur (M.H.) Jail. While he was sitting alongwith the accused on platform no. 2 with other Police fellows, he had gone booking window for getting warrant ticket in the meanwhile the accused took out his iron handcuff and ran away while the platform was over crowded. He tried to catch the accused but he could not do so. He informed the incident to Hawaldar. The search was made but the accused could not be searched.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: 37a54170-d81d- 4133-9abf-4d76b62a4b17 Signing time: 17-12-2025 10:49:08

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68063 3 CRA-1194-2010 Therefore the report was made.

9. PW-5 - Bhaskar Prahlad Toke, fellow Police officer who was taking the accused to Chandrpur Jail has stated that at that time he had gone to take the ticket.

10. The accused has denied the charges. Vide seizure memo (Ex.P-1) an iron handcuff jail warrant has been seized. It is admitted by learned counsel for both the parties that handcuff was not exhibited. Thus, this court wonders how in a crowded platform any person can run away unless the handcuff was already broken or it was not tied properly showing the negligence or connivance of the Police Officers. Therefore whole prosecution story is doubtful. No interface can be made in the acquittal order of the respondent. There is no perversity. Even otherwise in a case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Only magician can come out of his handcuff. Were the Police officers taking the magician who is expert in breaking the handcuff.

11. The appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE bks Signature Not Verified Signed by: 37a54170-d81d- 4133-9abf-4d76b62a4b17 Signing time: 17-12-2025 10:49:08

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court