Madhusudan vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 908

HRISHIKESH ROY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Madhusudan – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh Advocate, Mr. V.N. Raghupathy Advocate, Ms. Krishna Joshi Advocate, Mr. Kheyali Singh Advocate, Mr. Asha Upadhyay Advocate, Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Pandey Advocate, Mr. R.K. Kapoor Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Nachiketa Joshi AAG, Mr. Sunny Choudhary Advocate, Ms. Mrigna Shekhar Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Hrishikesh Roy, J.

Heard Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for appellant Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. R.K. Kapoor, learned counsel appears for appellant No. 2. The State is represented by Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, learned Additional Advocate General.

2. The present appeal is filed to challenge the impugned judgment dated 23.06.2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of 2000 whereunder the Indore Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh found the appeals to be devoid of merit and accordingly upheld the judgment of conviction passed against the appellants on 23.11.2000 in the ST No. 458 of 1998. The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. With the aid of Section 34 of the IPC, they were also convicted under Sections 307 and 323 of IPC and appropriate sentence for such conviction including life sentence, has been awarded against all the three accused.

3. On 17.07.1998, the FIR No. 294 of 1998 was registered at the Juni Police Station, Indore. The FIR indicated that at about 8:00 p.m. on 17.07.1998, while Mohan (PW-12) was taking food in his house, he heard commotion and saw the accused Ram Kripal with a sword in his hand, Babbu with a knife,