THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE vs ARIF KHA — Crl.A. No. 201/2011
Case under Section II-E. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010166982010
Filing Date
20-May-2010
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 201/2011
Diary Number
16698/2010
Order Date
22-Aug-2017
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE
Adv. C. D. SINGH (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.ARIF KHA
Adv. SIDDHARTH SINGLA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
22-Aug-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Aug-2017
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant
-
26-Apr-2017
ROPView PDF
-
26-Apr-2017
ROPView PDF
-
05-Jan-2017
ROPView PDF
-
05-Jan-2017
ROPView PDF
-
21-Nov-2016
ROPView PDF
-
21-Nov-2016
ROPView PDF
-
18-Oct-2016
ROPView PDF
-
18-Oct-2016
ROPView PDF
-
05-Sep-2016
ROPView PDF
-
05-Sep-2016
ROPView PDF
-
25-Jul-2016
ROPView PDF
-
25-Jul-2016
ROPView PDF
-
02-May-2016
ROPView PDF
-
02-May-2016
Office ReportView PDF
-
02-May-2016
ROPView PDF
-
11-Mar-2016
ROPView PDF
-
11-Mar-2016
Office ReportView PDF
-
11-Mar-2016
ROPView PDF
-
28-Jan-2016
ROPView PDF
-
28-Jan-2016
ROPView PDF
-
23-Nov-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Aug-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Aug-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-May-2015
ROPView PDF
-
06-May-2015
ROPView PDF
-
15-Dec-2014
ROPView PDF
-
15-Dec-2014
ROPView PDF
-
26-Sep-2014
ROPView PDF
-
20-May-2010
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 201/2011
Case Summary: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Arif Kha (Crl.A. No. 201/2011) The Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeals on August 22, 2017, upholding the High Court's acquittal of accused persons convicted for a 2000 robbery where jewelry was looted and a person assaulted. The Court found the prosecution's case fatally weakened by the complainant's non-examination, recovered ornaments lacking documentary corroboration, and witness identification inconsistencies (witness identified accused in parade but not in court). The Court affirmed the High Court's correct evidentiary appreciation, noting the accused had already served 8+ years imprisonment before acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts