The Madhya Pradesh High Court acquitted Nain Singh Dhruve and his son in a 2021 murder case, criticising police for fabricating evidence.

A key witness claimed to have spoken to the deceased after his death, which the Court dismissed based on the post-mortem report, stating, “Science hasn’t developed so much that a dead person can talk on a mobile phone.”

The court ordered a departmental inquiry by the DGP against the Investigating Officer and other officials for dishonest investigation and violating Articles 21 and 22. 

The inquiry report must be submitted within 30 days. The duo had been sentenced to life.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court fined a lawyer ₹10,000 for appearing in a court hearing via video conference while seated inside a car.

A Division Bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Anuradha Shukla said virtual hearings are meant to assist lawyers unable to appear physically, not to relax courtroom decorum.

The Court observed that appearing in a car compromises the dignity of the Court and reflects a lack of appropriate respect.

The lawyer has been directed to deposit the fine with the High Court Legal Services Committee. Further hearing on August 28. 

[Amrit Hones Private Limited v Income Tax Settlement Commission]

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the life sentence of chemistry lecturer Mamta Pathak, convicted of murdering her husband, Dr. Neeraj Pathak, by electrocuting him after sedating him with antipsychotic drugs.

A viral video had earlier shown her arguing her own case, challenging forensic findings.

However, a Division Bench of Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra found her guilt proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The Court rejected her claims of being falsely implicated and said the motive for marital discord and suspected infidelity was evident. Her interim suspension was cancelled, and she was directed to surrender immediately to serve the remainder of her sentence.

[Mamta Pathak v. The State of Madhya Pradesh]

A woman judicial officer in Madhya Pradesh, Aditi Gajendra Sharma, has resigned after the man she accused of harassment was elevated to the High Court.

In her letter, she expressed deep betrayal, saying the system she served failed her.

Despite raising complaints with top judicial authorities, she received no response. She said the judiciary ignored due process and rewarded the person she had accused with promotion.

The letter reportedly states that the judicial officer leaves the institution with "no medals" but a "bitter truth" that the judiciary not only failed her but failed itself.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, directed the State not to compel execution of a good‑conduct bond from a man labeled a habitual offender over a single Facebook comment about the Kumbh Mela, until further hearing.

The petitioner was ordered by an SDM under Section 129 BNSS, 2023, to furnish interim and final bonds of ₹25,000 for six months each.

The Court observed that no show‑cause notice or hearing was provided before declaring him a habitual offender. Justice Vishal Mishra listed the matter after four weeks, seeking the State’s response on procedural compliance. 

[Vivek Pawar v Sub Divisional Magistrate Bichhiya]

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ordered police to move a 17-year-old pregnant rape victim from the accused’s house, where she claimed a relationship, declaring that, as a minor, she cannot legally stay there.

Justice Vishal Mishra directed that the minor be handed over to her parents or, if they decline, placed in Nari Niketan.

The Court noted her pregnancy has crossed 26 weeks, and she must receive proper care. Since she refused an abortion and was medically unfit, the Court declined further intervention and closed the matter.

The writ petition was registered suo motu on a reference made by the special judge of the POCSO court.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed police and doctors to photograph victims' injuries of crime victims to assist courts in comprehending the nature of the injuries. 

Justice Subodh Abhyankar issued the order during an anticipatory bail hearing, observing that despite clear evidence of grievous injuries requiring hospitalisation, the police had registered the case under minor sections. 

The court expressed concern over the increasing tendency of police to downplay serious offences by invoking petty charges.

The court found the police report contradictory, as it acknowledged that the victims required immediate hospitalisation, highlighting a clear mismatch between the recorded charges and the actual severity of the injuries.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ordered Dilip Kumar Dureha, former Vice Chancellor of LNIPE and now a BHU professor, to pay ₹35 lakh to a Yoga instructor for sexual harassment. 

Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke relied on the Internal Complaints Committee’s 2020 findings, which confirmed that Dureha demanded sexual favours and behaved inappropriately.

The Court also directed LNIPE to pay ₹1 lakh for inaction and the State to pay ₹5 lakh for delaying the FIR for three years. Dureha had not challenged the ICC’s conclusions, leading the Court to uphold the findings.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to consider the representation of an IIT aspirant who faced technical glitches during the JEE Advanced 2025 exam.

The student claimed that he lost significant exam time due to server issues at the exam centre, affecting his performance.

The Court did not intervene directly but asked the NTA to address the grievance, emphasising fairness in the examination process. (Kumar Panchjanya v Union of India)

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, while hearing a plea by an NLIU Bhopal student challenging BCI attendance rules, orally observed that strict academic regulations in five-year law courses have enabled Indian students to excel in foreign universities.

The student sought relaxation from mandatory attendance requirements due to personal reasons, but the court highlighted that discipline and rigour are essential in legal education.

The court emphasized that institutions must maintain academic integrity.

The matter was posted for further hearing, with the court refraining from granting interim relief but asking the university to consider the student's representation sympathetically.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has issued notices to both the state and central governments regarding a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that calls for the establishment of a Passport Seva Kendra in Katni district.

Petitioners highlighted that residents currently travel long distances to access passport services, causing hardship and extra expenses, especially for vulnerable groups like women and senior citizens.

The argument was made that the absence of a local passport office violates Articles 14 and 21. The court has set the matter for a hearing in August 2025, underscoring the importance of accessible public services and administrative efficiency.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that no private individual, religious group, or NGO can install statues in public places; only the government and local bodies are authorised.

The decision came while hearing a PIL against an alleged illegal statue installation in Makdon.

Citing its 2022 ruling in Greeshm Jain v State of MP, the Court reiterated that all statues set up after January 18, 2013, on roads or public spaces must be removed.

The court directed the Chief Secretary to circulate the order to local bodies to ensure compliance and prevent potential public disorder.(Rajesh Kumar v. State of MP)