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) 2104

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rakesh Kumar Patel – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 36893/2023



Advocates:
Sanjay Kumar Patel,Advocate General

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:8671

1 MCRC-36893-2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI

th

ON THE 28 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 36893 of 2023

RAKESH KUMAR PATEL

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Sushil Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Amit Garg - PL for the respondent-State.

Shri Krishna Pratap Singh - Advocate for the respondent no.2.

ORDER

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure has been filed by the petitioner for quashment of the FIR

registered vide Crime No.116/2023 at Police Station Amarpatan, District

Satna, for the offence punishable under Sections 306/34 IPC, the charge-

sheet filed pursuant thereto, and the consequent proceedings pending before

the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Amarpatan, in Sessions Trial

No.20/2023.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 04.10.2022 one Nitesh

Patel died due to drowning in a dam. On the same day, a Marg was

registered at the instance of Gajadhar Prasad Patel, brother of the deceased,

wherein certain allegations were made against the present petitioner and

other co-accused persons. Subsequently, after a considerable delay, the FIR

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: 68a0eb5c-526b-

4cd2-b459-c24c3168a47d

Signing time: 02-02-2026

14:59:50

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:8671

2 MCRC-36893-2023

was registered on 18.03.2023 alleging that on account of political rivalry, the

petitioner along with other co-accused compelled the deceased to consume

alcohol heavily and thereafter instigated and abetted him to swim into the

dam with an intention to see him die, resulting in his death.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the entire

prosecution story is accepted on its face value, the essential ingredients of

Section 306 IPC are not made out. It is contended that there is no specific

act, proximate instigation, or intentional aid attributable to the petitioner so

as to constitute abetment of suicide. It is further submitted that the

allegations are vague, omnibus and highly improbable, and the delayed

registration of FIR clearly reflects afterthought and embellishment. Hence,

continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process

of law.

4. Learned State counsel opposed the petition and submitted that the

allegations disclose a prima facie case and the matter should be left for trial.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 opposes the petition

submitting that the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure deserves outright dismissal, as it seeks premature

evaluation of disputed facts and appreciation of evidence, which is wholly

impermissible in exercise of inherent jurisdiction. The prosecution case

clearly discloses that the deceased Nitesh Patel died on 04.10.2022 after

being systematically harassed, compelled to consume excessive alcohol and

thereafter deliberately instigated and abetted by the present petitioner and

other co-accused persons to swim into the dam with a clear and conscious

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: 68a0eb5c-526b-

4cd2-b459-c24c3168a47d

Signing time: 02-02-2026

14:59:50

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:8671

3 MCRC-36893-2023

intention to see him die. The acts complained of are not isolated or

innocuous, but are part of a concerted design arising out of political rivalry,

squarely attracting Sections 306 and 34 IPC.

6. As regards the delay in registration of FIR, the counsel for the State

as well respondent No. 2 submitted that delay by itself is not fatal,

particularly in cases involving unnatural death. Initially, a Marg was

registered on time containing allegations against the petitioner and other co-

accused persons and the family of the deceased was under shock and trauma.

The FIR was registered only after further facts came to light during inquiry,

which fully explains the time gap. The delay has already been accounted for

in the charge-sheet and cannot b

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