IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI

th

ON THE 25 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1207 of 2026 THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Versus RAJKUMAR SHARMA @ RAJU AND OTHERS Appearance:

Ms. Vineeta Sharma - Deputy Government Advocate for State.

JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant/State assailing the judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.10.2011 passed in S.T. No.678 of 2010 by the Eighth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal (M.P.) whereby the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') has been acquitted of the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. As per the story of prosecution, on 19.04.2009 at about 6:45 a.m., the complainant, Mrs. Sunetra Kane, had left her residence for her routine morning walk. While returning, near Gautam Nagar Sai Baba Temple, in the vicinity of Vijay Maternity Home, a boy, wearing a green T-shirt with a cloth tied over his face, approached her. The assailant, who was also wearing a dark grey jacket, of slim build, approximately 5 feet 9 inches in height, and aged about 25–26 years, arrived on a motorcycle, forcibly snatched a gold chain from the complainant’s neck, and fled from the spot. The incident was reported to the police, following which a site plan was prepared and statements of witnesses were recorded. Subsequently, when the accused were apprehended by Piplani Police Station in connection with another case, the stolen gold chain was recovered on the basis of the statements given by the accused.

3. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused by the Police Station, Govindpura, District-Bhopal (M.P.) under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Statement of the witnesses got recorded. Charges were framed; read out and explained to the accused. They denied to commit the crime and sought a trial. During their examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the accused stated that they were innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case.

4. In order to bring home charges, the prosecution examined as many as 09 witnesses, namely, Smt. Sunetra Kani (PW-1), Manish Kane (PW-2), Fakira Kachle (PW-3), Tahsildar Manish Shrivastava (PW-4), Sub-Inspector R.S. Sharma (PW-5), Ajay Jogi (PW-6), Assistant Sub-Inspector Chandrabhan Singh (PW-7) and placed Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/10 the document on record.

5. Learned trial Court after recording of evidence of the parties acquitted the accused, hence, this appeal.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/State that the accused persons have erroneously been acquitted despite ample evidence on record. It is also submitted that though the FIR has been lodged against unknown person but the looted chain has been seized from the possession of the accused persons and that has been well identified by the complainant as per identificaton memo (Exhibit-P/3). Accused persons have also been identified by identification memo (exhibit-P/4) and no anomaly has been revealed from the perusal of Exhibit-P/3 and P/4 and respective evidence on record of the persons who have got conducted this identification parade. It is also submitted that the seizure from the possession of the accused is also established, therefore, prayed that the impugned judgment be set aside and by allowing the appeal the respondents/accused be convicted and punished appropriately for the aforesaid offence.

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant/State and perused the record meticulously.

8. Complainant Sunetra (PW-1) has deposed before the learned trial Court that on 19.04.2009, while she was proceeding for her morning walk between Vijay Maternity Home and Sai Mandir, a person riding a motorcycle suddenly approached her from behind and snatched her gold chain weighing approximately 20 grams. She stated that the said person was aged about 25 to 30 years, of a height between 5 feet 8 inches to 5 feet 10 inche