Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt Jyoti vs State Of M P on 9 October, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29558
1 MCRC-44717-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 9 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44717 of 2025
SMT JYOTI
Versus
STATE OF M P
Appearance:
Shri Navendu Joshi - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Apoorv Joshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This first bail application has been filed by applicant under Section
483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail in
connection with Crime No. 216/2025 registered at Police Station- G.R.P.,
Ratlam, District- Ratlam (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 108
and 3(5) of the the BNS, 2023. Applicant is in judicial custody since
08.09.2025.
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 falsely implicated
in the alleged offence for the reason that the applicant is sister of Laxmi, wife
of deceased. Laxmi was residing at her parental home due to matrimonial
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29558
2 MCRC-44717-2025
discord with deceased Harish for last 45 days before his death. There was no
communication or quarrel in close proximity of death of Harish. No offence,
as alleged, is committed by the applicant. Learned counsel referring to
judgment of Hon'ble 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 or death of
Harish. Applicant is a married lady and resident of Indore. She is mother of
three children. The investigation is almost complete. Further custodial
interrogation of the applicant is not needed in the matter. There is no
likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. Jail incarceration is
causing hardship to the applicant and the dependent family. Applicant is
ready to cooperate in further investigation and trial.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State, ably assisted by learned
counsel for the objector, 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, Harish consumed
insecticides celphos in the night of 08/07/2025. He called Kuldeep
Khandelwal and Kartik. They found Harish vomiting near Railway
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29558
3 MCRC-44717-2025
construction shed at Ratlam. Harish was taken to Government Hospital,
Ratlam. Harish informed that he had consumed Celphos. Harish succumbed
to death next morning around 7:00 am. The dying declaration in the form of
videos recorded by Harish in his mobile phone was recovered, wherein he
alleged that his sister-in-law Aarti, Jyoti(applicant) and Indra had forcefully
taken his wife Laxmi on 25.05.2025. They are not permitting his wife to
return to matrimonial home. Laxmi is not returning to live with him. He has
consumed Celphos feeling aggrieved by harassment of Aarti, Jyoti and
Indra.. On such allegations, the Police Station - GRP, Ratlam registered FIR
for offence punishable under sections 108 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 against
Laxmi, Aarati, Jyoti, Indra, Deepak Sen and Gulab bai. The statement of the
witnesses were recorded. They also alleged that there was matrimonial
discord between deceased Harish and his wife Laxmi. Aarti, Jyoti and Indra,
sister-in-laws of deceased Harish, had quarrel with Harish and took Laxmi to
her parental home. Laxmi was pregnant. Thereafter, Harish went into
depression and committed suicide by consuming Celphos. Applicant Jyoti
was arrested on 08.09.2025. She is in custody ever since. The investigation is
underway. The material on record reveals that Laxmi, wife of deceased
Harish went to her parental home on 25.05.2025 after a quarrel with the
deceased. The deceased was aggrieved of the fact that his pregnant wife is
not returning to live with him. Prima-facie, there appears to be no
communication between the applicant and the deceased in close proximity of
his death. The contention of applicant regarding absence of ingredients of
abetment has prima facie substance. Co-accused Indra has been extended
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29558
4 MCRC-44717-2025
benefit of bail by this Court vide order dated 27.09.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.
No. 44142/2025. The veracity of prosecution and complicity of the applicant
in the alleged offence will be determined after evidence in the trial. The trial
would take time to conclude.
As informed, the applicant is aged around 33 years and mother of
three children. She is homemaker by profession. She has family
responsibilities. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility
of fleeing from justice. In absence of any criminal antecedent, 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
allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that applicant-Jyoti 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):-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:29558
5 MCRC-44717-2025
(1) Applicant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the
concerned court;
(1) vkosfndk lacaf/kr U;k;ky; ds funZs'kkuqlkj lquokbZ dh izR;sd frfFk ij mifLFkr jgsxhA
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) vkosfndk leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxk ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha gksxhA
(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) vkosfndk 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) vkosfndk 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 djsxhA
(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 djsxhA
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 of 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
conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
sh
