THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE vs RAMVEER SINGH — Crl.A. No. 575/2014

Case under 1511Comp-criminal Law : Criminal Matters Other Than Covered by the Aforesaid Categories(matters Filed by the State Government/ Complainant Against Acquittals or Reduction of Sentence.) Section II-E. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010082922012

Filing Date

12-Mar-2012

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 575/2014

Diary Number

8292/2012

Order Date

30-Jul-2025

Document Type

Judgement - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2025 INSC 952

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

1511COMP-Criminal Law : Criminal matters other than covered by the aforesaid categories(Matters filed by the State Government/ complainant against acquittals or reduction of sentence.) Section II-E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE

    Adv. SARAD KUMAR SINGHANIA[P-1]

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAMVEER SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Jul-2025

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 30-Jul-2025

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 30-Jul-2025

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta

  5. 07-Oct-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 07-Mar-2014

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 07-Mar-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 07-Nov-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 21-Sep-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 27-Jul-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 30-Apr-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 12-Mar-2012

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 575/2014

  13. [ 2025 INSC 952 ]

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramveer Singh Court Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal, upholding Ramveer Singh's acquittal. The Court found the prosecution case riddled with contradictions and held the dying declaration—the prosecution's primary evidence—unreliable due to the victim's critical condition (100% burns, unmeasurable vitals, barely audible voice). Key Reasoning: Both lower courts had disbelieved the eyewitness account. Critical infirmities in the dying declaration included the victim's precarious physical state making coherent narration virtually impossible, difficulty deciphering her dialect, and the officer's admission that he had to bend down to hear her barely audible speech. The Court applied the established principle that acquittals can only be overturned when guilt is the sole possible view; here, multiple reasonable interpretations existed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case