IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI

th

ON THE 8 OF JANUARY, 2026

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2228 of 2020

SACHIN CHOUDHARY AND OTHERS

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearance:

Ms. Pushpanjali Dwivedi - Amicus Curiae for appellants.

Mr. Shivam Dubey - Panel Lawyer for State.

JUDGMENT Suraj, with a knife, with the apparent intention to cause his death. The accused inflicted a knife blow on the stomach of Suraj, as a result of which blood started oozing from the injury. Thereafter, the accused persons continued to hurl filthy abuses at the complainant and her daughter and openly threatened to kill Suraj. Upon hearing the complainant’s cries for help, Anandi Chaudhary and other persons from the locality arrived at the spot and intervened, whereupon the accused fled from the scene.

This appeal has been filed by the present appellant being aggrieved by

the judgment dated 17.02.2020 passed by the learned Fifteenth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur (M.P.), in Sessions Trial No.93 of 2017 whereby the appellant Sachin @ Changu Choudhary has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and appellants Ajay Choudhary and Umesh Choudhary have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer three years rigorous imprisonment each with fine of

Rs.1,000/- each, with default stipulation.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 4 December 2016, at about 8:45

p.m., the complainant, Smt. Gulab Bai, was present at her residence when she heard loud shouts and abusive language emanating from outside her house. Upon immediately rushing to the spot, she witnessed the accused, namely Changu alias Sachin and Bhutta alias Umesh, assaulting her son,

3. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted in the competent court, which on its turn committed the case to the court of session from where it was made over to Fifteenth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur (M.P.) for trial.

4. The learned Trial Judge on the basis of averments made against the appellants in the charge sheet framed charge for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506-B and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 294, 506-B, 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants abjured their guilt and claimed to be tried. They took the plea that they have been falsely implicated in the matter. They have not chosen not to examine any witness in their defence.

5. In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses, which are Suraj Chouhdary (PW-1), Gulab Bai Choudhary (PW-2), Durgesh Mahobiya (PW-3), Ajju @ Ajay (PW-4), Rahul Gupta (PW-5), Naresh Choudhary (PW-6), Shubham Ben (PW-7), Anand Choudhary (PW-8), Dr. Harish Lodhi (PW-9), Dr. Ashutosh Pokharkar (PW- 10), A.S.I. Ashok Kumar Dubey (PW-11), Shivkumar Patel (PW-12) and Sub-Inspector Nirupa Pandey (PW-13) and placed Ex.P/1 to P/16 and Ex.D/1 and D/2, the documents on record.

6. Learned trial Court, after hearing both the parties, found the prosecution case proved in respect of commission of offence punishable under Sections 326 and 326/34 of IPC. Learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants for commission of offence as shown herein-above in paragraph 1. Hence, this appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the prosecution version, the present appellant Sachin @ Changu Choudhary is alleged to have caused an injury to Suraj (PW-1) by means of a knife, while the other two appellants are stated to have scuffled with Suraj and assaulted him. It is further contended that although an injury has been found on the abdomen of Suraj (PW-1), the testimony of Dr. Harish Lodhi (PW-9) clearly reveals that at the time of medical examination, the victim was under the influence of liquor. The doctor has further opined that if a person is under the