[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Karu @ Asharam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 December, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34891
1 MCRC-53928-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 1 st OF DECEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 53928 of 2025
KARU @ ASHARAM
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Aayush Pandey - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Amit Raval - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This first bail application has been filed by applicant under Section
439 of Cr.P.C./ 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of
regular bail in connection with Crime No. 535/2025 registered at Police
Station- Bilpank District- Ratlam (M.P.) for offence punishable under
Sections 108 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Applicant is in judicial custody
since 19.09.2025.
Heard the arguments.
Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case
diary and the relevant material on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds
mentioned in the application submits that the applicant is implicated in the
alleged offence merely on suspicion. Deceased Jeevan Das suspects illicit
relations of his wife with the applicant. Jeevan Das was aggrieved of his wife
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34891
2 MCRC-53928-2025
and committed suicide due to her conduct. There is no allegation that the
applicant - Karu alias Asharam ever communicated with Jeevan Das in close
proximity of his death. No offence, as alleged, is committed by the
applicant. Learned counsel referring to judgment of the Supreme Court in the
case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR
2002 SC 199; Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu Vs. State of West Bengal,
reported in (2010) 1 SCC 707,Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Others reported in 2020(SCC Online) SC 964 and
Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2025 INSC
990, contends that mere harassment without any positive proximate action
on part of the accused showing mens-rea to abet the suicide does not amount
to abetment for suicide.The final report has been filed on completion of
investigation. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by
the applicant for the reason that he is not capable of influencing the
prosecution witness. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant
and the dependent family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on
the ground of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going through the
case diary, he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the
applicant.
According to the material available on case diary, Jeevan Das
Bairagi was married to Maya Bai. Maya Bai left her matrimonial home
alongwith her daughters and went missing. Jeevan Das lodged missing report
on 05.09.2025. Jeevan Das was distressed and suspected illicit relations of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34891
3 MCRC-53928-2025
his wife Maya Bai with Karu alias Aasharam(applicant). There was
matrimonial discord between Maya Bai and Jeevan Das. Maya Bai had
goaded Jeevan Das to die during quarrel with him. Jeevan Das hanged
himself on 13.09.2025. Devendra, brother of the deceased Jeevan Das,
submitted a written complaint on 18.09.2025 and alleged that Maya Bai and
Karu alias Aasharam are responsible for suicide of his brother. On such
allegations, the P.S. Bilpank registered FIR for offence punishable u/S 108
and 3(5) of BNS,2023 against Maya Bai and applicant - Karu alias
Aasharam. Applicant was arrested on 19.09.2025. He is in custody ever
since. The material on record prima-facie does not reveal any
communication of applicant with deceased Jeevan Das in close proximity of
his death. The veracity of prosecution and complicity of the applicant in the
alleged offence will be determined after evidence in the trial.
As informed, the applicant is aged around 36 years. He is a labourer
by profession and has the responsibility of dependent family. Considering
these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In
absence of any criminal antecedents, considering the socio-economic status
of the applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with
evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be
no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However,
the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.
Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the
case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the merits,
this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34891
4 MCRC-53928-2025
allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that applicant- Karu alias Aasharam shall
be released on bail in connection with Crime, as mentioned in first paragraph
of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of the same amount to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the following conditions :
(For convenience of understanding by accused and surety, the conditions of
bail are also reproduced in Hindi as under):-
(1) Applicant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the
concerned court;
(1) vkosnd lacaf/kr U;k;ky; ds funZs'kkuqlkj lquokbZ dh izR;sd frfFk ij mifLFkr jgsxkA
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) vkosnd leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxk ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha gksxkA
(3) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to
any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them/him/her from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer;
(3) vkosnd izdzj.k ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh O;fDr dks izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls izyksHku]
/kedh ;k opu ugha nsxh ftlls ,slk O;fDr ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky; ;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh dks
izdV djus ls fuokfjr gksA
(4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the evidence or
allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) vkosnd izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls lk{; ds lkFk NsMNkM djus dk ;k lk{kh ;k lkf{k;ksa
dks cgykus&Qqlykus] ncko Mkyus ;k /kedkus dk iz;kl ugha djsxkA
(5) During trial, the applicant shall ensure due compliance of provisions of Section 309
of Cr.P.C./346 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding examination of
witnesses in attendance;
(5) fopkj.k ds nkSjku] mifLFkr xokgksa ls ijh{k.k ds laca/k esa vkosnd /kkjk 309 na-iz-la- ds
izko/kkuksa dk mfpr vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djsxkA
This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of
breach of any of the preconditions of bail, the trial Court may consider, on
merit, cancellation of bail without any impediment from this order.
The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the personal
bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of
them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he/she had explained the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34891
5 MCRC-53928-2025
conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
sh
