##PAGE1##

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026

(@ SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026)

BHAIYALAL ADIVASHI APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant was charged for the offences

punishable under Sections 302, 323 and 294 of

the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the

IPC’).

3. The Trial Court, after considering the evidence

available on record, was pleased to convict the

appellant for the offences punishable under

Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC and acquit him

for the offence punishable under Section 294 of

the IPC. He was, accordingly, sentenced to life

imprisonment by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by

SWETA BALODI the same, the appellant filed an appeal before

Date: 2026.02.27

17:28:24 IST

Reason:

the High Court. The High Court, in turn, was

1

SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026

##PAGE2##

pleased to modify the conviction from one under

Section 302 to Section 304 Part-II IPC, while

maintaining the conviction under Section 323

IPC. He was, accordingly, sentenced to ten years

of rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved, the

appellant is before us.

4. We have issued a limited notice with respect to

the quantum of sentence alone.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant

submitted that inasmuch as the High Court itself

has come to the conclusion that it is a case

falling under Part-II of Section 304 IPC, it

should have taken note of the mitigating

circumstances.

6. The appellant has conducted himself in prison to

the satisfaction of the prison authorities. It

is further submitted that the appellant is aged

54 years, as of now.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the State

submitted that though the judgment of the High

Court has not been challenged by the State, one

has to see the nature of the injuries caused to

the deceased. The postmortem report clearly

2

SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026

##PAGE3##

suggested that the deceased died due to the

injuries caused. The deceased was in hospital

for four days.

8. After hearing the submissions made, we find that

the occurrence took place pursuant to a quarrel

between the appellant and the deceased. The

appellant, on getting enraged, took a wooden log

which was lying at the spot and gave a single

blow to the deceased.

9. Considering the above, coupled with the period

of incarceration undergone by the appellant

which is six years and two months with

remission, we are inclined to take the said

factors as mitigating circumstances along with

good conduct of the appellant and modify the

sentence imposed upon the appellant to the one

already undergone by him.

10. Accordingly, while confirming the conviction,

the sentence imposed upon the appellant stands

modified to the one already undergone by him.

The appellant shall be released forthwith,

unless required in any other case.

11. The appeal is allowed in part, accordingly.

3

SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026

##PAGE4##

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of.

……………………………………………………………………J.

[M.M. SUNDRESH]

………………………………………………………………………J.

[VIPUL M. PANCHOLI]

NEW DELHI;

27th FEBRUARY, 2026

4

SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026

##PAGE5##

ITEM NO.50 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-E

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)

No(s). 1357/2026

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order

dated 09-05-2025 in CRLA No. 3191/2023 passed by

the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Principal Seat

at Jabalpur]

BHAIYALAL ADIVASHI Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)

Date : 27-02-2026 This matter was called on for

hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

For Petitioner(s) Ms. Alka Sinha, Adv.

Ms. Shrika Gautam, Adv.

Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR

For Respondent(s) Mr. D. S. Parmar, A.A.G.

Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR

Mr. Anurag Singh, Adv.

Ms. Silpi S Swain, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made

the following

O R D E R

Leave granted.

The appeal is allowed in part in terms of the signed

order.

5

SLP(CRL.) No.1357/2026

##PAGE6##

Pending appli

Click Here to Read the rest of this document