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

2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 6631

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
B. P. SHARMA, J
ABDUL HAKEEM – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1194 of 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Prahlad Choudhary, Ms. Divyani Choudhary
For the Respondents: Shri Satyapal Chadar

The prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant voluntarily caused simple injuries, corroborated by credible testimonies and medical evidence.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 323 - Criminal appeal against conviction - Appellant convicted for voluntarily causing simple hurt - The trial court's findings regarding the injuries sustained were affirmed - Prosecution's evidence supported by medical findings, proving the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 4, 12, 13)

(B) Evidence - Standards of Proof - The detailed and corroborated testimonies of related witnesses were deemed credible, with no bias established - Reliability of medical evidence further supported the prosecution's case. (Paras 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
The incident involved the appellant objecting to the complainant's grandmother collecting wood, leading to an altercation resulting in injuries to both the complainant and his mother. The prosecution established a case of simple injury against the appellant.

Findings of Court:
The court found the evidence sufficient to uphold the trial court's conviction.

Issues: Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the evidence?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and reaffirmed the reliability of the testimonies despite their familial relation.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. case background of assault during a scuffle. (Para 3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA rd ON THE 23 OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1194 of 2018 ABDUL HAKEEM Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Prahlad Choudhary, Senior Counsel with Ms. Divyani Choudhary, counsel for appellant.

Shri Satyapal Chadar, Government Advocate for respondent/State.

Reserved on : 19.09.2025 Pronounced on : 23.09.2025 JUDGEMENT This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.10.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mandla in Special Sessions Trial No.200017/2016. By the said judgment, the learned trial Court found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH

323 (two counts) of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and fine of Rs.1,000/-,Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulation.

2. Briefly stating the case of prosecution was that on the date of incident 10.1.2016 at about 9 AM, Leelabai, the grandmother of Devendra Marko (PW1) was collecting wood near the drainage, upon which accused Hakim objected. Leelabai replied that she is collecting wood from her own side and not on his. Thereafter the accused Hakim said to Devendra to pacify her grandmother, to which Devendra replied that she has pacified and asked the accused not to abuse. Thereafter they had a scuffle. At that moment accused Naseem reached there armed with axe, and during the scuffle Suhanabai PW2 (mother of Devendra) fell down as she was pushed, resulting in injuries to right leg. A report to this effect was lodged and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the conviction recorded by the trial court is erroneous and liable to be set aside. It was contended that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients especially voluntarily causing hurt of the offence under Sections 323 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. Reliance was placed on the alleged Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH contradictions and omissions in the statements of witnesses, particularly regarding the sequence of events and the nature of injuries sustained by Suhanabai. They are related witnesses. Counsel emphasized that the complainant’s allegations regarding the conduct of the accused were self- contradictory and exaggerated, and that the medical evidence did not fully substantiate the prosecution’s version. PW4 to PW7 have turned hostile. The independent witnesses have denied the incident.

4. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the prosecution has proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt. It has been submitted that the ocular testimony of the complainant (PW-1), supported by her grandmother (PW-2) is consistent, credible, and corroborated by medical evidence Ex.P/13 to P/16. The accused has assaulted (PW1) Devendra and (PW2) Suhanabai. No case is made out for interference with the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the Trial Court.

4. The point for determination is as thus:

5. Whether learned trial Court committed error in appreciation of evidence on record?

Finding with Reasoning Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH

6. Complainant Devendra (PW1) has stated that on the date of incident at 10 AM, while his grandmother Leelabai was collecting firewood near the drainage, at that moment accused Hakim came out of his house and started abusing his grandmother. He (witness) also came out, whereafter Hakim told him to persuade his grandmother, he said he had persuaded her, and said not to hurl abuses. When her mother Suhanbai came out, accused Hakim pushed her and also gave a blow by wooden part of axe, consequently she fell down, and sustained injuries on her leg.

7. Suhanabai (PW2)

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