A Madhya Pradesh court has convicted seven men in connection with a 2022 riot and murder case in Narmadapuram district that resulted in the death of one person and left several others seriously injured. However, despite the convictions, the court’s findings do not support claims made by some media outlets that the incident was a case of “cow vigilantism” or “gau rakshak violence,” as reported in OpIndia Hindi.
On 12 June 2026, Additional Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan convicted seven accused, Deepak alias Baba Kevat, Ajay alias Ajju Rathore, Prakash Kaushal, Pawan Bathav, Amar alias Bhola Bathav, Kanhaiya Bathav and Ballu alias Anuj Raghuvanshi under Sections 302, 307 and 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The court sentenced all seven convicts to life imprisonment.
While the accused were convicted for offences related to murder, attempt to murder and rioting, several media reports described the case as an instance of “cow vigilante violence” merely because the vehicle involved in the incident was transporting cattle. Some reports also referred to the convicts as “gau rakshaks” despite the court’s judgment containing no such characterization.
In addition, some media reports incorrectly claimed that 14 people had been sentenced to life imprisonment, whereas the court actually convicted and sentenced seven individuals.
What Happened On The Night Of 3 August 2022?
According to details recorded in the judgment, the incident occurred around midnight on 3 August 2022 on Nandarwada Road near Barakhed village under the Seoni Malwa police station limits in Madhya Pradesh’s Narmadapuram district.
The complainant, truck driver Sheikh Lala, was travelling with Nazir Ahmed and Sheikh Mushtaq in a truck carrying cattle. The truck was travelling from Nandarwada towards Amravati in Maharashtra.
As the vehicle approached Barakhed village late at night, a group of approximately 10 to 12 villagers armed with sticks allegedly attacked the occupants of the truck.
Sheikh Lala, Nazir Ahmed and Sheikh Mushtaq were assaulted during the attack.
Police subsequently arrived at the scene and shifted the injured men to the Community Health Centre (CHC) in Seoni Malwa. While Sheikh Lala and Sheikh Mushtaq sustained serious injuries, Nazir Ahmed later died during treatment.
Following the incident, Seoni Malwa police registered an FIR against 10 to 12 unidentified persons under Sections 147, 148, 341, 307 and 302 of the IPC.
Subsequently, seven accused were prosecuted and ultimately convicted for some of the offences mentioned in the FIR.
Court Examined Whether The Truck Was Deliberately Stopped
The judgment reveals that the court framed seven issues for determination during the trial. One of the key questions before the court was whether the accused had intentionally intercepted and stopped the truck before launching the attack.
The court specifically examined whether the accused had wrongfully restrained Sheikh Lala, Nazir Ahmed and Sheikh Mushtaq while they were travelling in truck number MH-40-CD-8751.
After examining witness testimony and other evidence, the court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the charge of wrongful restraint.
In other words, the court found that it had not been proven that the accused deliberately stopped the truck before the assault took place.
Court Says No Evidence Of Truck Being Blocked
In Paragraph 96 of the judgment, the court recorded that the allegation of wrongfully restraining the victims was not proved.
The court noted that eyewitnesses Sheikh Lala and Syed Mushtaq did not testify that any member of the crowd had blocked their vehicle before the attack. The judgment further observed that their statements to the police also contained no reference to the truck being stopped or obstructed.
The court additionally stated that no other evidence had been produced to establish that the accused had blocked the vehicle.
The finding is significant because some media reports linked the incident to alleged cow vigilantism on the premise that the victims’ truck was carrying cattle and had allegedly been intercepted. However, the court’s findings do not establish that the truck was deliberately stopped by the accused before the assault.
A plain reading of the judgment indicates that the court treated the matter as a case involving murder, attempt to murder and rioting. The judgment itself does not describe the incident as an act of “cow vigilantism,” nor does it refer to the convicted persons as “gau rakshaks.”
While the court found the seven accused guilty of participating in the assault that resulted in Nazir Ahmed’s death and injuries to others, the conclusions recorded in the judgment do not support the specific narrative advanced by some media reports that portrayed the case as one of organised cow vigilante violence.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
