SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(MP) 632

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL, J.
Devi Singh Meena S/O Hariram Meena - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
Misc. Criminal Case No.36063 of 2022
Decided on : 08-04-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :SHRI SANKALP KOCHAR - ADVOCATE
For the Respondent:SHRI MANOJ KUSHWAHA – PANEL LAWYER, SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR SINGH – ADVOCATE

The Magistrate's discretion to take cognizance is not bound by the investigating officer's opinion, and the plea of alibi must be proven at trial, not at the cognizance stage.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 190 - Inherent powers under Section 482 - Cognizance of offence - The Magistrate took cognizance against the applicants for murder based on eyewitness statements despite their alibi claims. The court emphasized that the plea of alibi cannot be considered at this stage and that the Magistrate's discretion in taking cognizance is not bound by the investigating officer's opinion. (Paras 1, 4, 10, 20)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Taking cognizance - The court reiterated that taking cognizance does not require meticulous appreciation of evidence and that the Magistrate can act independently on the materials available. (Paras 8, 19)

(C) Alibi - The burden of proof lies on the accused to establish an alibi, which cannot be considered at the cognizance stage. (Paras 15, 20)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged the Magistrate's order taking cognizance for murder based on eyewitness accounts, despite their claims of being elsewhere at the time of the incident.

Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the Magistrate's order, affirming that the evidence presented justified taking cognizance.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Magistrate erred in taking cognizance without considering the alibi and the sufficiency of evidence from eyewitnesses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Magistrate's role is to determine if there is sufficient material to take cognizance, and the plea of alibi must be proven at trial, not at this stage.

Result: Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

This petition has been filed to invoke the inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. assailing order dated 28.04.2022, passed in Criminal Revision No.75/2022 (Devi Singh Meena & Others Vs. State of M.P.) by 25th District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal arising out of order dated 13.12.2021, passed by Shri Krishanpal Singh Sisodiya, JMFC by which in exercise of powers under Section 190(1)(a) of Cr.P.C, the Magistrate has taken cognizance against the applicants for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC.

2. The necessary facts for disposal of this petition are that on 20.10.2020 at around 2:50 P.M. Ombabu Meena resident of village Barai, Police Station Bhopal informed Purendra Singh, Police Inspector/SHO Police Station Katara Hills that he is resident of Barai and is a farmer. Today at around 2:00 P.M. he was working in his compound in front of his house. His wife Jyoti and sister Seema were sitting in the Varandah of the house. His mother was roaming outside the Varandah. In the meantime his uncle Devi Singh’s son Raju Meena armed with axe along with his elder brother Jeevan Meena and father Devi Singh Meena uttering abuses came. Uncle Devi Singh exhorted Raju and asked him to eliminate all as they always raise disputes about land and compound (Bada). On the basis of exhortation given by uncle Devi Singh, Raju Meena with an intention to kill his mother gave axe blow on her neck due to which she fell down on the earth but Raju repeatedly hit her. Owing to fear, his wife Jyoti and sister fled away and bolted the house from inside. Jeevan was also exhorting Raju saying that today they have to eliminate all. Upon hearing screams, when number of villagers reached there, Devi Singh, his son Jeevan and Raju fled away from the spot. His mother had died. On account of old enmity with regard to land and compound dispute they all in furtherance of common intention had come and on the basis of exhortation given by Devi Singh and Jeevan, Raju murdered his mother Shanta Bai. Devi Singh and Jeevan had played active role in murder of his mother. On the basis of narration given by Ombabu Meena within 50 minutes of the incident, Dehati Nalsi was recorded and on the basis of Dehati Nalsi FIR No.213/2020 was registered at Police Station Katara Hills, Bhopal for commission of offence under Section 302/34 of IPC. Same day Ombabu Meena’s statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. His wife and sister’s statements were recorded on 24.10.2020. In postmortem examination 16 injuries were found on the dead body of the deceased. On 11.01.2021, Police filed charge sheet only against Raju @ Rajkumar Meena for commission of offence under Section 302 of IPC. Charge sheet was not filed against present applicants as investigation under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C was shown to be going on.

3. On 23.10.2020, one Arun Meena, S/o Bharat Singh Meena, resident of Village Surod, District Vidhisa submitted an application in writing before Additional Superintendent of Police, Bhopal stating false implication of Devi Singh and Jeevan in the alleged crime. In the course of investigation with regard to Devi Singh, Jeevan and Omvati Police got recorded the statement of Jitendra Meena, Shubham Sahu, Ashok Meena and Devki Bai under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. They stated that at the time of commission of offence Devi Singh, Jeevan and Omwati were not present on the spot. Police also recorded the statement of Om Prakash Meena and Om Prakash Sharma. It collected mobile location of the Mobile No.982775428 and footage of one camera of Traffic Police Control Room, Raisen. As per Police in CCTV footage, Jeevan Meena’s car bearing registration No. MP-04-CL-5092 at 2:50 P.M is seen. Police also recorded the statement of Arun Meena, Neeraj Lodhi, Jitendra Meena, Harnam Singh Yadav and Babribhan Meena who stated that on the date of incident at 2:30 P.M. Jeevan Meena was with them. As per police at 2:58 P.M., Jeevan is seen in camera of AU Bank, Raisen. As

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top