Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhuralal Sisodiya @ Bhuriya vs Police Headquarters on 11 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:6564
1 MCRC-6864-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 11th OF MARCH, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9166 of 2025
DEVILAL SISODIYA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Manu Maheshwari, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Romil Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Shri Akhilesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the Objector.
WITH
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6864 of 2025
BHURALAL SISODIYA @ BHURIYA
Versus
POLICE HEADQUARTERS
Appearance:
Shri Manu Maheshwari, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Romil Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Shri Akhilesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the Objector.
ORDER
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to
rely upon the documents wherein defects have been pointed out by the
Registry (pages 43-45, 47-50 and 59).
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:6564
2 MCRC-6864-2025
Accordingly I.A.No.2977/2025 is dismissed as not pressed.
2. These second and first bail applications under Section 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 439 of
Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the applicants - Devilal Sisodiya S/o Saudan
Sisodiya and Bhuralal Sisodiya @ Bhuriya S/o Kailash Sisodiya respectively
for grant of regular bail, who have been arrested on 22.10.2024 in connection
with Crime No.246/2024, registered at Police Station Boda District Rajgarh
(M.P.) for commission of offence under Sections 123, 103, 3(5) and 232 of
BNS, 2023. First application of the applicant Devilal Sisodiya has been
dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 21.02.2025 in
M.Cr.C.No.5933/2024.
3. As per prosecution story, on 02.09.2024 at around 4:30 PM the
deceased Sushmita Sisodiya was restrained by applicants alongwith other
accused persons namely Abhishek Sisodiya, Ram Bharose Sisodiya, Bhuriya
Sisodiya and Kailash Sisodiya who forcibly administered poison to force her
to retract her statement in criminal case which was got registered by her
against Abhishek and Ramsakhi vide Crime No.33/2023 registered at Police
Station Boda District Rajgarh. Subsequently, the deceased reached home and
omitted several times and informed the members of her family who took her
to the hospital where dying declaration of deceased Sushmita was recorded
and thereafter she was transferred to another hospital for further treatment
and during transitory period, she passed away. The matter was reported at
Police Station Boda and case was registered vide Crime No.246/2024 for
commission of offence under Sections 123, 103, 3(5) and 232 of BNS, 2023.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:6564
3 MCRC-6864-2025
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and have falsely been implicated in the crime. In earlier case both
the accuses persons have been granted bail and even in statement under
Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, the deceased has not uttered a single word
against the accused Abhishek for sexually exploiting her, rather she
mentioned that she want to live with Abhishek and will not go with her
parents. It is further submitted that in the present case, charge sheet has been
filed and no charge under Section 232 of BNS, 2023 has been framed which
was the basis of whole prosecution story that she was threatened to retract or
abstain from giving evidence against Abhishek, who is also accused in this
case. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the dying
declaration recorded on 02.09.2024 at 7:10 PM by Dr. P.S.Parmar and
submits that even though names of accused persons alongwith applicants
Devilal Sisodiya and Bhuralal Sisodiya are mentioned in the dying
declaration, but it is not clear as to whether she was administered poison
forcibly or she herself consumed the poison and for this query was raised
which was answered by the concerned doctor on 17.09.2024 which was point
no.3 of the query. The doctor has not made clear that the deceased was
administered poison forcibly or she has herself consumed it. No mental
fitness certificate has been attached to the dying declaration of the deceased.
It is further submitted that except dying declaration there is no reliable
evidence to connect the applicants with the alleged crime. They are suffering
incarceration since 22.10.2024. The co-accused Kailash has been granted
bail vide order dated 22.01.2025 in M.Cr.C.No.54273/2024. No purpose will
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:6564
4 MCRC-6864-2025
be served in keeping the applicants behind the bar as investigation is
complete and charge sheet has been filed. There is no sufficient evidence
available on record to establish the complicity of the accused with the
alleged crime. There is no likelihood of their absconsion leaving their
family, home and profession and also there is no likelihood of tampering
with evidence by applicants. Final conclusion of the trial will take
considerable long time, therefore, learned counsel prays for allowing the bail
applications and for grant of bail.
5. To bolster his submissions he has relied on the judgments in the
case of Jagdish and another Vs. State of Haryana 2009 SCC Online P&H
551 (Paras10 and 11), Irfan @ Naka Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh 2023 SCC
Online SC 1060 (Paras 39,43,47,62 and 63) and Manjunath and Others Vs.
State of Karnataka 2023 SCC Online SC 1421 (paras 11.5 and 11.6).
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has
vehemently opposed the prayer on the ground that deceased has been
forcibly administered poison and for that purpose ample evidence is on
record and not only this, Sumit brother of the deceased Sushmita has also
given statement which implicate the applicants with the alleged crime. He
has referred to the statement under Section 180 of BNSS, 2023 of Dr.
P.S.Parmar, who has recorded the dying declaration and prays for dismissal
of the bail applications.
7. In reply, learned counsel for the applicants submits that it has not
been mentioned that Sumit, alleged eye witness was present on the spot.
8. Learned counsel for the Objector also opposed the prayer and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:6564
5 MCRC-6864-2025
prays for dismissal of the bail applications.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
10. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, when prima facie dying
declaration of the deceased even though disputed by the learned counsel for
the applicants, it is clear that poison has been administered to the deceased
and that poisonous substance has also been found in the Visra, looking to the
evidence in entirety, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicants.
The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants are
distinguishable on facts and are of no avail to the applicants. Accordingly,
the regular bail applications filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are dismissed.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
RJ
