Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pushpa Shukla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-1159-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1159 of 2025
(PUSHPA SHUKLA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 04-08-2025
Shri Dhiresh Singh Dubey, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
Heard on I.A.No.2376 of 2025 , which is an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C./430(1) of Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of appellant No.1 Pushpa Shukla and
appellant No.2 Ravi Shukla, who are respectively mother-in-law and husband of
the deceased Smt. Ratnakala @ Pinki Shukla.
This appeal is filed by the appellants being aggrieved of judgment dated
11.01.2025 passed by learned 14th Addl. Sessions Judge Rewa, District Rewa
(M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 88 of 2019, whereby the appellant No.1 Pushpa
Shukla and appellant No.2 Ravi Shukla have been convicted and sentenced as
under:
Conviction Sentence
Section Act Imprisonment Fine if Imprisonment
deposited in lieu of fine
498 A IPC R.I. for 2 years to Rs.1000/- to R.I. for three
each each months to each.
304 B IPC R.I. for life - -
imprisonment to
each
4 Dowry R.I. for 2 years to Rs1,000/- to R.I. for three
Prohibition each each months to each.
Act
It is pointed out that Namrata Shukla, sister of the deceased, who has been
2 CRA-1159-2025
examined as PW-7. In her case diary statement dated 11.04.2019, which is
available on record of the trial Court, has clearly stated that she was talking to the
deceased once or twice in a month on her mobile phone and deceased Ratnakala
had never informed her about any suffering or pain in her matrimonial house, she
used to say that everything is fine.
It is further submitted that PW-11, Rashid Khan, who has been examined
by the prosecution, too has admitted that the relationship between the deceased
and the appellants was cordial.
In fact, PW-1, father of the deceased Shri Ramashray Tiwari has admitted
that when he had gone to the house of the appellants for fixing relation of his
daughter with appellant Ravi, then he had found that the house was double storey,
it was a pakka house, having four rooms, two on the ground floor and two on the
upper floor, his father and brother of Ravi were dead, he had found that Ravi was
carrying out a clothing store, he had visited that clothing store also and after
satisfaction performed marriage of his daughter. He further admits that when he
had gone for fixing the marriage, he had stayed in the house of Ravi for 5-6 hours,
there was T.V., Sofa etc.
It is also submitted that in para 7 of the cross-examination, this witness has
admitted that initially his daughter had never complaint of any suffering or
demand of dowry. Later on, he has stated that for the first time Ratnakala had
informed her sister-in-law i.e. wife of Sandeep, about she being beaten. However,
sister-in-law of Ratnakala has not been examined.
Sandeep Tiwari, PW-2, brother of the deceased was declared
hostile.Thereafter he has admitted in his cross-examination that his sister was
3 CRA-1159-2025
happy with the marriage and till six months prior to her death he had no
knowledge about in-laws beating her.
It is also pointed out that in para 7, this witness has stated that when he used
to visit matrimonial house of his sister, she never informed him anything about
harassment or dowry demand.
PW-3, Smt. Uma Tiwari, in para 3 of cross-examination, admitted that
when after Biddai deceased had visited her when she did not made any complaint
in regard to demand of dowry or harassment. After 6-7 months of marriage she
had stated that her mother-in-law was pouring milk/oil and then blames her as a
result of which Ravi beats her.
However, in para 4 of cross-examination, she admits that she had not asked
anything to the mother-in-law, son-in-law was busy in paper formalities, he had
stated that he has not killed their daughter. They had returned back from hospital
on the second day they attended the cremation. Even PW-1 admitted that they
attended cremation which was performed by Ravi and his family members and
after cremation they had returned back to home. There is also in admission that
after four days of cremation, report was lodged.
Thus, it is pointed out that there are omnibus and general allegations of
demand of dowry, appellants were on bail during trial. There are good chances of
success in the appeal. Hence, prayer is made to suspend execution of remaining
part of the jail sentence of the appellant No.1 Pushpa Shukla and appellant No.2
Ravi Shukla and to release him on bail.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the prayer
for suspension of sentence.
4 CRA-1159-2025
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that
there appears to be good chances of success in appeal, without commenting on
merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to suspend the
remaining part of jail sentence of appellant No.1 Pushpa Shukla and appellant
No.2 Ravi Shukla and release them on bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.2376 of 2025 is allowed .
It is directed that on depositing fine amount, if not already deposited and on
furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only)
each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
for their appearance before the trial Court on 27.10.2025 and on all subsequent
dates as may be fixed by the concerned Court, the execution of remaining part of
the jail sentence of the appellant No.1 Pushpa Shukla and appellant No.2 Ravi
Shukla shall remain suspended and they be released on bail till final disposal of
this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
MTK
