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) 2608

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Surendra Rai Sharma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 51058/2019



Advocates:
Hardayesh Kumar Shukla,Rohit Mishra

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4967

1 MCRC-51058-2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

ON THE 4th OF FEBRUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 51058 of 2019

SURENDRA RAI SHARMA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Hardayesh Kumar Shukla - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Sankalp Sharma - Advocate for the respondents/Lokayukt

ORDER

The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure has been filed by the petitioner for expunging of the adverse

remark recorded by the learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption) and

First Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in Sessions Trial No. 300006/2016

(State of M.P. through Special Establishment Lokayukt, Bhopal Unit Gwalior

vs. Seetaram & Others) vide judgment dated 22.10.2019.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the Police

Department and, after rendering long and unblemished service, retired on

31.08.2015 from the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lokayukt.

During service, the petitioner was posted in the Special Establishment

Lokayukt, Gwalior. A charge-sheet was filed by the Lokayukt Police against

accused Seetaram Sen for commission of offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)

(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It was

alleged that the accused, while working as a clerk in Tehsil Bhitarwar,

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: YOGENDRA

OJHA

Signing time: 2/7/2026

1:02:24 PM

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4967

2 MCRC-51058-2019

demanded and accepted illegal gratification from complainant Jagannath

Singh for mutation of his possession in revenue records in respect of Patta

land. After registration of FIR, investigation was initiated and vide order

dated 23.06.2014 the Superintendent of Police, Special Establishment

Lokayukt, Gwalior authorized the present petitioner to further investigate the

matter. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner recorded statements of witnesses

and also issued a letter to the accused for providing his voice sample, which

the accused refused to give. Being the Investigating Officer, the petitioner

also addressed a letter to the Tehsildar, Bhitarwar seeking service particulars

of the accused. In response, the Tehsildar, Bhitarwar furnished certain service

details vide letter dated 30.10.2014, exhibited as P/24. Since the information

supplied was incomplete, the petitioner again wrote a letter to the Tehsildar,

Bhitarwar on 21.07.2015 for furnishing complete service particulars.

Thereafter, vide letter dated 07.08.2015, the Tehsildar supplied further

service details of the accused. The petitioner retired from service on

31.08.2015 and, upon retirement, handed over the entire case diary and all

relevant documents to the subsequent Investigating Officer. The remaining

investigation was thereafter conducted by DSP Shri R.B. Sharma, who was

duly authorized by the Government and who ultimately completed the

investigation and filed the charge-sheet before the competent court. During

trial, the prosecution examined its witnesses including Jagannath Singh

(PW/1) and Narendra Tripathi (PW/8). The petitioner also appeared as PW/5

and duly proved the part of investigation conducted by him, including Dehati

Nalishi Ex. P/13. The learned Trial Court, after appreciation of evidence,

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: YOGENDRA

OJHA

Signing time: 2/7/2026

1:02:24 PM

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4967

3 MCRC-51058-2019

recorded a finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond

reasonable doubt and accordingly acquitted the accused. Although the

learned Trial Court acquitted the accused persons, in the concluding

paragraph of the judgment an observation was made to the effect that due to

negligence on the part of the Investigating Officers in not collecting the

service record of the accused, the accused was acquitted, and consequently

the Director General, Special Police Establishment, Lokayukt Organization,

Bhopal was directed to i

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