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

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1850

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rupesh Dangi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRR 4433/2024



Advocates:
Aniruddha Gokhale,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4433 of 2024 RUPESH DANGI Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Satyendra Kumar Vyas - Senior Advocate with Shri Aniruddha Gokhale - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Gajendra Singh Dodia- GA for the State.

Shri C.L.Yadav- Senior Advocate with Shri Jagdish Chand Dangi-

Advocate for the respondent no.2 to 4.

WITH CRIMINAL REVISION No. 5073 of 2024 MANISHA DANGI Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri C.L.Yadav- Senior Advocate with Shri Jagdish Chand Dangi-

Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Gajendra Singh Dodia - GA for the State.

(Heard on: 09.01.2026)

(Delivered on: 27.01.2026)

ORDER Both the revision petitions arisen out of an incident dated 09.05.2019 at village Sedra within the territorial jurisdiction of P.S.-Chapiheda, District Rajgarh (M.P.) and a crime no.122/2019 and crime No.123/2019 were registered.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that revision petitioner of both the petitions were husband and wife. They were married on 28.1.2007 through Arya Samaj Mandir, Bhopal and on 27.04.2007 at collective marriage ceremony at village Dakora. Revision petitioner in CRR No.4433/2024 husband got selected as ACI-II in 2009. Later on revision petitioner in CRR No.5073/2024 got selected on the post of Sub-Inspector in M.P. Police Department. Their personal life did not continued cordial. A series of cases were filed between the couple and vide judgment dated 28.07.2018 in RCHMS No.13/2017 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajgarh (M.P.). The marital tie was dissolved. The dissolution of the marriage did not result in the resolution of the disputes.

3. The genesis of the present revision petitions is incident dated 09.05.2019 at village Sedra, P.S.-Chapikheda, District- Rajgarh (M.P.) where both attended the marriage ceremony. First Information Report of crime No.122/2019 at P.S.- Chapikheda, District- Rajgarh (M.P.) was lodged by one Omprakash Dangi Advocate by profession. The contents of the FIR was that Rupesh Dangi dashed his wife Manisha Dangi and her 3 month old daughter by Indigo Car. This informant was representing Manisha Dangi in her divorce case. In the incident, Omprakash Dangi sustained injuries. Primarily this offence was registered under section 279 & 337 of the IPC against Rupesh Dangi. The charge sheet was submitted under section 279, 337 and 307 of the IPC. Vide impugned order dated 12.08.2021 in ST No.28/2020 charges under section 307 of the IPC were framed against Rupesh Dangi and challenging the framing of charges in ST No.28/2020 arising out of crime No.122/2019 registered at P.S.- Chapikheda, District- Rajgarh (M.P.) CRR No.4433/2024 have been preferred.

4. At the same time FIR of Crime No.123/2019 was registered by one Mukesh companion of Rupesh Dangi against Omprakash @Om Dangi and three companions for attempt to murder of Rupesh Dangi under section 294, 323, 337 and 506 of the IPC. The case was committed to the sessions court and was registered as ST No.27/2020.The proceedings were challenged before the High Court and vide order dated 14.07.2022 in MCRC No.3249/2022. The FIR of Crime No. 123/2019 dated 10.05.2019 was registered at Police Station Chapikheda, District Rajgarh (M.P.), and the charge-sheet arising therefrom, along with all consequential proceedings of S.T. No. 27/2020, were quashed qua Manisha Dangi. The aforesaid order was challenged by Rupesh Dangi before the Apex Court and Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 09.12.2024 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.15705/2023 set aside the order dated 14.07.2023 in MCRC No.32495/2022 passed by High Court of M.P. at Indore with the following observations:-

" Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the High Court stands set aside.

It is informed that respondent No. 2 was granted bail:

however, she shall appear before the trial Court on the date so fixed in the trial and shall cooperate in early disposal of trial.

It is

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