IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI

th

ON THE 20 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2773 of 2014 UMESH @ DEENDAYAL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Durgesh Gupta - Counsel for the appellant Shri Amit Pandey - Government Advocate for respondent-State Reserved on : 15/10/2025 Pronounced on : 20/02/2026 ORDER Per: Justice Ajay Kumar Nirankari This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2)

of Cr.P.C against the judgment dated 31/07/2014 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of Additional Judge Chhindwara in S.T.No.186/2013, whereby the appellant has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

2. The brief facts necessary for proper adjudication of the case are that on 13/04/2013 at about 11:30 a.m.deceased Lalita Bai in a burnt condition reached at Police Station Tamia, District Chhindwara, and made an oral complaint. She stated that she, along with her husband Umesh, her child Navin and her uncle had gone to explore Patalcoat. After visiting Patalcoat, they had food. Thereafter, her husband attempted to consume liquor and when she restrained him, a quarrel ensued. She further alleged that at about 3:00 a.m., her husband and uncle unsuccessfully attempted to kill her. Subsequently, after some time her husband poured acid or some other inflammable substance on her, set her on fire and threw her into a ditch. Thereafter, her husband fled from the spot along with the uncle and also took away her son Navin. After some time, she somehow managed to come out of the ditch and reached near a water tank. Two girls, namely Basanti and Kavita, then took her to the police station.On the basis of the said oral complaint, the police registered Crime No.54/2013 under Sections 307, 326- B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the present appellant and other co-accused who known as topi wale uncle. After registration of FIR, the deceased was sent for medical examination. She was medically examined on 13/04/2013 at about 11:50 a.m. As per the MLC report, she had sustained approximately 82–90% burn injuries. Considering the seriousness of her condition, the police commenced investigation, recorded statements of witnesses, seized relevant articles, and arrested the appellant.

3. During investigation, the memorandum of the appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act was recorded and on his instance, the dead body of a child aged about six years was recovered in a decomposed condition.

4. During treatment, on 22/04/2013, Lalita Bai succumbed due to her injuries. Post-mortem was conducted, and as per the medical opinion, she died due to superficial burn injuries. The post-mortem of child Navin was also conducted and the cause of death was opined to be strangulation. The competent authority also recorded the dying declaration of the deceased.

5. After completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet before the Magistrate against the appellant and co-accused Laxman, alleging that they had conspired to kill the deceased and her son. It was also alleged that under the pretext of exploring Patalcoat, they vacated the rented house where the deceased was residing, took her to Patalcoat by Magic Car, poured an inflammable substance on her and set her on fire and committed the murder of six-year-old child by strangulation.

6. The Judicial Magistrate first class after committal forwarded the case to session court for trial and the matter was registered as S.T.No.186/13 before the First Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara.

7. Learned trial court formulated the charges under Section 302 and in alternative 302/34 & 201 of IPC against the present appellant and co- accused Laxman.Appellant refused to accep