inkinccorporation@gmail.com Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satya Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 February, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933 1 MCRC-58000-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 58000 of 2025 SATYA AHIRWAR AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Shri Yash Sharma - Advocate alongwith Shri Siddharth Tripathi - Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Kalpana Parmar - Public Prosecutor for the State. Shri Devraj Dixit - Advocate for the respondent No.4. RESERVED ON :- 23/02/2026 DELIVERED ON :- 26/02/2026 ORDER
By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has
been preferred by petitioners No.1 to 4, namely, Satya Ahirwar, Munesh
Ahirwar, Sunil Kumar and Suresh Ahirwar respectively under Section 528 of
BNSS/482 of CrPC seeking quashment of F.I.R. bearing Crime No.328 of
2025 registered at Police Station Aron, District Guna (M.P.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 3(5) AND 117(2) of BNS,
2023 and all consequential criminal proceedings initiated therefrom.
As per prosecution story, on the basis of information received from
Civil Hospital, Aron, Head Constable Jaydev Singh Yadav brought the
Dehati Nalishi to Police Station Aron for registration of offence bearing
Crime No. 0/2025 under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 118(1), 191(2), 191(3),
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
2 MCRC-58000-2025
190 of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(d), 3(1)(ch), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Satya @
Satyanarayan (petitioner No.1), aged about 26 years, son of Brihmadas
Ahirwar , resident of Village Gehunkheda, Police Station Aron, while
undergoing treatment in injured condition at Civil Hospital, Aron, lodged an
oral report alleging that on 28.06.2025 at about 3:30 PM, he along with his
father Brihadas, and his uncles Suresh (petitioner No.2), Sumesh
(Munesh)/(petitioner No.2), and Sunil Ahirwar (petitioner No.3) were sitting
outside their milk dairy plant and conversing. At that time, the accused
persons, namely, 1. Raghuveer s/o Diman Singh, 2. Lakhan s/o Diman Singh,
3. Mukesh @ Bhura s/o Diman Singh, 4. Veer Singh s/o Diman Singh,
5.Ramswaroop Kori s/o Misrilal, 6. Bhola @ Kishan s/o Amar Singh, 7.
Nikhil Kori, s/o Santosh 8. Abhishek s/o Mukesh, 9. Shiva s/o Amar Singh,
10. Mangal s/o Lakhan, 11. Ravi s/o Narvada Prasad, 12. Nitesh s/o
Purushottam, 13. Vishal s/o Purushottam, 14. Santosh s/o Veer Singh, 15.
Kamal Singh s/o Diman Singh, 16. Amar Singh s/o Veer Singh, 17. Shivam
s/o Mukesh (caste: Bunkar/Fori), 18. Ajay s/o Balwant Prajapati, 19. Chhotu
s/o Balwant Bunkar, all residents of Village Gehunkheda, along with 4–5
other associates, allegedly arrived together on an old Swaraj 733 FE tractor
with a yellow-painted trolley, armed with iron rods, axes (farsa), and lathis. It
was alleged that due to previous enmity, the accused persons started abusing
the complainant and his family members in filthy language. When the
complainant and his father objected to the abuses, accused Lakhan,
Abhishek, Mukesh @ Bhura, Shivam, and Ravi Kori allegedly assaulted the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
3 MCRC-58000-2025
complainant’s father with iron rods with an intention to kill him, causing
injuries on his head, hands, legs, and abdomen, as a result of which he fell
down and started bleeding from his head.
When uncle Suresh (petitioner No.4), Sunil (petitioner No.3), Munesh
(petitioner No.2), and the complainant(petitioner No.1) attempted to rescue
him, Santosh allegedly assaulted Suresh (petitioner No.4) with a farsa, while
Ramswaroop, Raghuveer, Amar Singh, and Veer Singh assaulted him with
lathis, causing injuries to his head, left shoulder, and left arm, resulting in
bleeding. It was further alleged that Kamal Singh, Ravi Kori, Vishal Kori,
and Nitesh Kori assaulted uncle Sunil (petitioner No.3) with chain-sprocket
iron rod-like weapons, causing injuries to his head and mouth, and fracturing
his right hand. Similarly, Shiva, Mangal, Bhola, and Nikhil Kori allegedly
assaulted uncle Munesh (petitioner No.2) with lathis, causing injuries to his
hands, legs, and back. The complainant further alleged that Lakhan,
Abhishek, Mukesh, Chhotu Prajapati, Ajay Prajapati, and 4–5 other
associates assaulted him with iron rods and lathis, caused injuries to his head
and nose, bleeding, and fractures to his right hand and both legs below the
knees. All the accused persons, forming an unlawful assembly and armed
with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant and his family members
with an intention to cause death and inflicted grievous injuries. It was further
alleged that upon hearing the commotion, villagers including Gajraj Singh,
Sudhir, Gopal, Nannulal, Bhagwat, and Poorat Singh arrived at the spot and
intervened, after which the accused persons fled from the scene along with
the tractor. Thereafter, the injured persons were taken by their family
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
4 MCRC-58000-2025
members to Civil Hospital, Aron for treatment, where the report was lodged
and subsequently the crime was registered. This constitutes the prosecution
story as reflected from the Dehati Nalishi and FIR dated 26.09.2025 for the
purpose of adjudication of the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioners No. 1 to 4, namely, Satya Ahirwar,
Munesh Ahirwar, Sunil Kumar and Suresh Ahirwar, argued that the present
criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 0328 dated 08.07.2025
registered at Police Station Aron, District Guna, are manifestly attended with
mala fide intention and constitute a clear counterblast to FIR No. 0314 dated
28.06.2025 lodged by the Petitioners against Respondent No. 2 and other co-
accused persons for grave and heinous offences including murder. The
impugned FIR has been instituted only after the arrest of nineteen accused
persons in the earlier case and after the fatal assault upon the father of
Petitioner No. 1, thereby demonstrating that it is a retaliatory and vindictive
measure intended solely to pressurize and harass the Petitioners.
It is submitted that the genesis of the incident has been deliberately
suppressed in the impugned FIR. The true sequence of events reveals that on
28.06.2025 Respondent No. 2 and his associates, armed with iron rods,
lathis, axes and other deadly weapons, formed an unlawful assembly and
brutally assaulted the Petitioners and their family members. Late Brahmdas
Ahirwar, father of Petitioner No. 1, sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to
the same. The Petitioners themselves suffered grievous injuries including
fractures and bleeding head injuries and were medically examined and
treated at Civil Hospital, Aron and thereafter referred for further treatment.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
5 MCRC-58000-2025
The medical documents, seizure memos, arrest of nineteen accused persons
and the charge sheet filed in FIR No. 0314/2025 conclusively establish that
the Petitioners were victims of a murderous assault and not aggressors.
In stark contrast, the impugned FIR No. 0328/2025 was registered ten
days after the alleged incident and only after the principal accused in the
murder case had been taken into custody. The alleged complaint dated
01.07.2025 surfaced belatedly and the delay in registration remains wholly
unexplained. Such inordinate delay itself casts serious doubt on the
authenticity of the allegations and clearly indicates that the impugned FIR
has been fabricated to create a counter narrative and to dilute the gravity of
the offences committed by Respondent No. 2 and his associates.
It is further submitted that the allegations made in the impugned FIR
are omnibus, vague and devoid of specific overt acts attributable individually
to the present Petitioners. Bald and sweeping allegations have been made
without any independent corroboration. No weapon has been recovered from
any of the Petitioners. The house search memo categorically records that no
incriminating material or weapon was seized. The medical documents relied
upon by the Respondent side do not substantiate the allegation that the
Petitioners inflicted grievous injuries. Except for minor and inconsequential
observations in respect of one individual, no serious injury has been
medically established. Significantly, no medical record has been produced to
demonstrate any injury to Amar Singh, who is alleged to have been attacked.
These material contradictions completely undermine the prosecution case in
the impugned FIR.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
6 MCRC-58000-2025
It is respectfully submitted that the existence of a long-standing land
dispute has been exploited by the Respondent side to give a criminal colour
to what is essentially a civil disagreement regarding possession and
cultivation. The allegation that the Petitioners were ploughing the land of the
complainant is false and concocted. In fact, as reflected in the earlier FIR
lodged promptly from the hospital, the Petitioners were present near their
dairy/warehouse premises when they were attacked by the Respondent side.
The contemporaneous medical evidence and official press note issued by the
Superintendent of Police, Guna, corroborate the Petitioners’ version and
clearly establish that the Respondent side were the aggressors.
It defies logic and ordinary human conduct to suggest that four
severely injured individuals, including one who had just lost his father in a
fatal assault, could have voluntarily inflicted grievous injuries upon a larger
group of nineteen armed persons. The final report in the impugned FIR
implicates only four Petitioners, whereas in the connected case nineteen
accused persons have been charge-sheeted. The inherent improbability of the
Respondent’s version further demonstrates the mala fide nature of the
impugned proceedings.
It is also submitted that the impugned FIR has been maliciously
engineered to obstruct Petitioner No. 1 from securing compassionate
appointment consequent upon the death of his father, who was serving as a
Government Teacher. The pendency of a criminal case adversely affects his
eligibility and reputation. The timing and circumstances of registration of the
impugned FIR unmistakably point towards a deliberate design to cause
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
7 MCRC-58000-2025
harassment and prejudice.
It is further submitted that the investigation in the impugned FIR is
one-sided and biased. All cited witnesses are closely related to Respondent
No. 2 and other accused persons, and no independent witness has been
examined. Material contradictions between medical evidence and allegations
have been ignored. Such an investigation cannot form the basis of a fair and
impartial criminal prosecution.
It is a settled principle of law, as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, that
criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed where the allegations, even if
taken at face value, do not disclose the commission of any offence, or where
the proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide intention and
instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance. The present case
squarely falls within the parameters so laid down. The uncontroverted
material on record overwhelmingly supports the Petitioners’ version and
renders the impugned FIR wholly untenable.
The continuation of proceedings pursuant to FIR No. 0328/2025
would therefore amount to gross abuse of the process of law and would
result in miscarriage of justice. The Petitioners have no other efficacious
remedy except to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The present
Petition has been filed bona fide and in the interest of justice, and this
Hon’ble Court has the requisite jurisdiction to grant the relief sought.
In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions, it is most humbly
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
8 MCRC-58000-2025
prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash FIR No. 0328/2025
dated 08.07.2025 registered at Police Station Aron, District Guna, Madhya
Pradesh, along with the consequential charge sheet and all further
proceedings arising therefrom against the present Petitioners, in the interest
of justice.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State submitted that the
present Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed at the
threshold. The impugned FIR No. 0328/2025 dated 08.07.2025 has been
registered on the basis of a written complaint disclosing commission of
cognizable offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The
allegations contained therein, when taken at face value, clearly disclose the
commission of offences and therefore warrant a full-fledged trial. It is settled
law that at the stage of quashing, this Hon’ble Court is not required to
conduct a meticulous appreciation of evidence or adjudicate disputed
questions of fact.
It is further submitted that the existence of a cross-case arising out of
the same incident does not ipso facto render either FIR liable to be quashed.
Both versions of the occurrence are required to be investigated independently
and adjudicated on the basis of evidence led before the trial Court. The
defence taken by the Petitioners regarding delay, medical inconsistencies, or
alleged improbabilities are all matters of evidence which can only be
examined during trial and not in proceedings invoking inherent jurisdiction.
It is therefore submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
9 MCRC-58000-2025
after due investigation, statements of witnesses have been recorded, and
sufficient material has been collected to proceed against the Petitioners. The
inherent powers of this Court are to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional
circumstances, which are not made out in the present case. Accordingly, the
present petition deserves to be dismissed.
Shri Devraj Dixit, Advocate for Respondent No.4, submitted that he
has no concern with the present matter and does not wish to press any
arguments
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is trite law that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court is to be
exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution, only to prevent abuse
of the process of law or to secure the ends of justice. The principles
governing the exercise of such power have been authoritatively laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp
(1) SCC 335, wherein illustrative categories were enumerated where
quashing of criminal proceedings would be justified, including cases where
the allegations in the FIR do not prima facie constitute any offence, or where
the proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide intention and
instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance.
The law has been further reiterated in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab,
AIR 1960 SC 866, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that proceedings
can be quashed where there is a legal bar to institution, or where the
allegations even if accepted in entirety do not constitute the offence alleged,
or where the allegations are so absurd and inherently improbable that no
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
10 MCRC-58000-2025
prudent person could ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient
ground for proceeding. Similarly, in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v.
Mohd. Sharaful Haque, (2005) 1 SCC 122, it was held that where criminal
proceedings are initiated with mala fide intention or to wreak vengeance, the
High Court would be justified in exercising its inherent powers.
In the present case, the record unmistakably reveals that FIR No.
0314/2025 was registered immediately after the incident dated 28.06.2025 in
which late Brahmdas Ahirwar, father of petitioner No.1, suffered fatal
injuries. Nineteen accused persons were arrested, weapons were seized,
medical and post-mortem reports were collected, and a detailed charge sheet
has been filed. The contemporaneous medical evidence clearly demonstrates
that the petitioners themselves sustained grievous injuries during the
occurrence.
In contrast, the impugned FIR No. 0328/2025 was registered on
08.07.2025 on the basis of an alleged complaint dated 01.07.2025, after the
arrest of the accused persons in the earlier FIR. The delay remains
unexplained. The allegations against the present Petitioners are general and
omnibus, lacking specific attribution of overt acts. No weapon has been
recovered from the Petitioners. The house search memo records absence of
recovery. The medical material relied upon in the impugned case does not
substantiate the allegation of grievous assault by the Petitioners. The
improbability of four injured persons, one of whom had just lost his father in
a fatal assault, voluntarily causing serious injuries to a larger group of
nineteen armed persons, renders the prosecution version inherently doubtful.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
11 MCRC-58000-2025
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial
Magistrate, (1998) 5 SCC 749, emphasized that summoning of an accused in
a criminal case is a serious matter and the criminal law cannot be set into
motion as a matter of course. Likewise, in Necharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 19 SCC 401, while cautioning that quashing
should be exercised sparingly, the Court also reiterated that where the
complaint does not disclose any offence or is manifestly attended with mala
fides, the High Court would be justified in exercising jurisdiction under
Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In the facts of the present case, the chronology of events, the existence
of a prior FIR involving a fatal assault, the unexplained delay in registration
of the impugned FIR, absence of recovery, lack of credible medical
corroboration and the apparent retaliatory intent cumulatively establish that
the impugned proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide intention
and constitute an abuse of the process of law. Continuation of such
proceedings would result in grave miscarriage of justice.
This Court is therefore satisfied that the present case squarely falls
within the parameters laid down in Bhajan Lal (supra), R.P. Kapur (supra),
and other binding precedents governing the exercise of inherent powers.
Accordingly, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed. FIR No. 0328/2025
dated 08.07.2025 registered at Police Station Aron, District Guna, Madhya
Pradesh, along with the charge sheet dated 26.09.2025 and all consequential
proceedings pending before the learned JMFC Court, Guna, insofar as they
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:6933
12 MCRC-58000-2025
relate to the present petitioners, stand quashed.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
