STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus SHYAMLAL & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 4 S.C.R. 144 · Decided: 19-03-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 4 S.C.R. 144 : 2025 INSC 377
State of Madhya Pradesh 
v. 
Shyamlal & Ors. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1254 of 2024)
20 March 2025
[Abhay S. Oka,* Ahsanuddin Amanullah and 
Augustine George Masih, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The High Court converted the conviction of respondents u/s.302 of 
IPC into the second part of s.304 of the IPC. Whether the judgment 
of the High Court requires interference.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 and second part of s.304 – The case 
of the prosecution was that the accused, with a common 
intention and object, came together and assaulted PW-1, 
PW-2, PW-3, PW-11, PW-12 and the deceased, on 01.11.1989 – 
The Trial Court convicted the respondents for the offences 
punishable u/s.147 and ss.452, 302, 325, and 323 r/w. s.149 
of the IPC – By the impugned judgment, the High Court 
proceeded to set aside the conviction of the respondents for 
the offences punishable u/s.302 r/w. s.149 of the IPC – The 
High Court converted the conviction u/s. 302 into the second 
part of s.304 of the IPC – Correctness:
Held: The deceased was not admitted on the day of incident – In 
the impugned judgment, the High Court observed that the deceased 
complained of headache and was treated in the district hospital 
for twelve days and was discharged – While returning home along 
with PW-4, he again complained of a headache and was, therefore, 
admitted to the hospital, where he died on 15.11.1989 – Thus, the 
death was fifteen days after the incident – The post-mortem report 
records that the cause of death was asphyxia, but the exact cause 
of death could not be ascertained – Neither the cause of death 
mentioned in the post-mortem report nor the evidence of PW-17 
prove that the injuries inflicted upon the deceased resulted in his 
death – The medical evidence creates a serious doubt as to whether 
* Author
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 
145
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shyamlal & Ors.
injuries allegedly inflicted by the respondents caused the death of 
victim – Therefore, there is a serious doubt whether even s.304 
of the IPC could have been applied, as the medical opinion does 
not support the theory of homicidal death of the deceased – That 
is why it is not possible to interfere with the judgment of the High 
Court directing that the respondents-accused should be let off for 
the offence u/s. 304, r/w. s.149 of the IPC, on the sentence that 
has been undergone – When the High Court decided the appeal 
in 2017, the incident was already twenty-eight years old – When 
this Court is deciding this appeal of the year 2024 (arising out of 
a special leave petition of the year of 2018), the incident is almost 
thirty-six years old – When the judgment of the High Court was 
delivered, at least five accused were above seventy years of 
age, and one of them was of the age of about eighty years – A 
substantial amount of Rs.16,000/- each has been imposed by the 
High Court by way of fine – Therefore, it will not be appropriate 
to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court.  
[Paras 12, 13 and 14]
Appeals – Appeals against conviction – Old age of accused – 
Long lapse of time from commission of offence – Where 
accused is on bail – Priority to the appeals:
Held: The old age of the accused and the long lapse of time from 
the commission of the offence can always be a ground available to 
give some priority to the appeals against conviction of the accused 
on bail – If the appeals against conviction where the accused are 
on bail and especially where a life sentence has been imposed 
are heard after a decade or more from its filing, if the appeal is 
dismissed, the question arises of sending the accused back to 
jail after a long period of more than a decade – Therefore, it is 
desirable that certain categories of appeals against conviction 
where the accused are on bail should be given priority. [Para 15]
Case Law Cited
Ahmed Hussein Vali Mohammed Saiyed & Anr. v. State of Gujarat 
[2009] 8 SCR 719 : (2009) 7 SCC 254; Fatta & Ors. v. State of 
U.P. (1979) SCC (crl) 629 – referred to.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860.
146
[2025] 4 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
List of Keywords
Second part of s.304 IPC; Pendency of very old criminal appeals; 
Accused in prison; Accused on bail; Old age of accused; Long 
lapse of time from commission of offence; Life sentence.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1254 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 24.08.2017 of the High Court 
of M.P. Princip
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.