CW-2018-0007Bhind, Madhya PradeshJudgment 24 May 2018

Bhind Man and Anr vs State of M.P.

Appellants Bhure and Shripal were convicted under Section 364-A IPC and the MPDVPK Act by the Special Judge, Bhind, and spent 12 to 15 years in prison for alleged kidnapping for ransom. The Madhya Pradesh High Court (Gwalior Bench) acquitted the appellants, finding the prosecution story fabricated in collusion between the complainant and the police to gain popularity through fake and imaginary encounters. Holding that the appellants' fundamental rights under Article 21 were deliberately and maliciously violated by police misconduct, the High Court directed the State of Madhya Pradesh to pay Rs. 3,00,000 compensation to each surviving appellant, with liberty to recover the amount from the erring persons. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 24 May 2018 in Criminal Appeal No. 460 of 2004, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Vivek Agarwal, G.S. Ahluwalia, JJ.) returned findings adverse to the Investigating Officer, Bhind Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 6 lakh (Rs 6,00,000).

Register number
MP 30 CW 0003
Case reference
Criminal Appeal No. 460 of 2004
Court and date
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Vivek Agarwal, G.S. Ahluwalia, JJ.), 24 May 2018
Officer(s) at the material time
Investigating Officer, Bhind Police
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Section 11/13 of the Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Thus, it is held that as it has been found that the appellant was prosecuted with deliberate and malafide intention, so that the complainant may settle his scores, and the police also joined hands with the complainant so that it …” (at para 27)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 6 lakh (Rs 6,00,000).
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment dated 24 May 2018 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“Thus, it is held that as it has been found that the appellant was prosecuted with deliberate and malafide intention, so that the complainant may settle his scores, and the police also joined hands with the complainant so that it …” (para 27)

Institutional response

1
24 May 2018

Order issued

Concluded
Madhya Pradesh High Court External · Binding

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 600,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: Criminal Appeal No. 460 of 2004
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.