SURENDRA SINGH vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 153

DIPANKAR DATTA, MANMOHAN
SURENDRA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, Sr. Adv., Mrs. Madhu Suri, Adv., Ms. Jyoti Suri, Adv., Ms. Ishita Ahuja, Adv., Mr. Vibhor Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Saurabh Jha, Adv., Mr. Deva Vrat Anand, Adv., Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. V.V.V.M.B. Pattabiram, D.A.G., Mr. Sarthak Raizada, Adv., Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR, Mr. Gautam Singh, Adv.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant in CRA No.1500/2014, on the file of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore^1.[High Court], is also the appellant before us. He is aggrieved because his criminal appeal is not being listed for consideration, despite the fact that he has suffered incarceration for more than 10 years. Such incarceration is owing to conviction recorded, inter alia, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the appellant for which he is serving a term of life in prison.

3. By the notice issuing order dated 29th November, 2024, this Court had observed that pendency of the special leave petition would not stand in the way of the roster bench of the High Court to hear the criminal appeal, on priority, having regard to the long incarceration of the appellant.

4. Office report dated 20th January, 2025 reveals that the said order dated 29th November, 2024 has duly been communicated to the Registrar General of the High Court for compliance.

5. Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, complains that despite such order, the appeal was not listed with the result that the appellant is languishing in the correctional ho

Click Here to Read the rest of this document