Supreme Court questions MP High Court for 'cryptic' murder conviction reduction

The Supreme Court is reviewing this alteration and questioning the High Court's reasoning.

Who it concerns: Petitioner: Rampal Parteti; Respondent: The State of Madhya Pradesh; Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran.

What the court decided

• The Court expressed the opinion that the High Court erred in applying Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC and in convicting under Section 304 Part II instead of Section 304 Part I.
• The Court is inclined to interfere with the High Court's judgment.
• The Court called upon the accused to show cause as to why the Trial Court's conviction for murder should not be restored.
• Notice was issued to the accused, returnable on 18.11.2026.
• The State was directed to serve the notice through the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Chhindwara.
• The Registry was directed to translate the order into Hindi and forward it to the Superintendent of Jail.

Also in the document

• The Court described the High Court's discussion of evidence as 'cryptic' and 'casual,' noting it ignored the testimony of the deceased's sister (PW-7).
• The Court stated that even if Exception 4 to Section 300 applied, the conviction could have been at most under Section 304 Part I, not Part II.
• The order is an interim direction calling for show cause, not a final judgment restoring the conviction yet.