Madhya Pradesh High Court
Archana Saket vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 October, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-6417-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 6417 of 2024
(ARCHANA SAKET Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 29-10-2025
Shri Maneesh Kholia - Advocate for the appellant - Archana Saket.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar - Government Advocate appearing on behalf of
Advocate General for State of M.P.
Heard on I.A. No.24288/2025 , which is second bail application under
Section 430(1) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/389(1) of the
Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail.
The appellant is aggrieved of the judgment dated 27.04.2024 passed by
the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa, District- Rewa in S.T.
No.208/2022, whereby appellant - Archana Saket has been convicted and
sentenced as under :-
S e n t e n ce
Conviction
Section Act Imprisonment Fine if Imprisonment
fine deposited in lieu of Fine
details
302 IPC Life Rs.2000/- R.I. for six
Imprisonment months.
120-B IPC Life Rs.2000/- R.I. for six
Imprisonment months.
201 IPC R.I. for 5 years Rs.1000/- R.I. for three
months.
This is second application for suspension of remaining jail sentence
2 CRA-6417-2024
and grant of bail as first application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 1.10.2024.
It is submitted that the appellant is innocent. There is no connecting
material to connect the appellant with her memorandum. This court has
already extended benefit of suspension of sentence in favour of co- accused
namely - Sandeep Saket.
It is also submitted that evidence of PW-4 mother of the deceased is
incongruent and therefore it cannot be relied on.
It is submitted that merge investigation was very savvy and did not
reach to any conclusion. Thus, there is no material on record to connect the
present appellant with her memorandum (Ex.P-11).
Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of M.P.
submits that it is true that neither any cup of alcohol or bottle of alcohol or
any excreta be it vomit or loose motion were recovered from the place of
the incident to corroborate with the memorandum under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act but there are call details showing conversations with the
appellant - Archana from her mobile number namely 8817179598 with co-
accused Sandeep Saket on his mobile number namely 8359010017. It is thus
pointed out that this electronic evidence is sufficient to connect the appellant
- Archana with Sandeep Saket.
At this stage, Shri Manish Kholia, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that after a call at 21.18.19 to 21.19.00 lasting for 41 seconds calls
are SMS enclosed as Article-17 to Article 21 including certain photographs.
It is also submitted that Archana had performed a notarial marriage
3 CRA-6417-2024
with Sandeep Saket as can be seen from Ex.P-18 and Ex.P-19 which were
filed by Sandeep Saket and Archana Saket respectively.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record we would like to direct the Principal Secretary, Law and Legislative
Department to take action against Shri B.P. Patel, Notary, Rewa, M.P. for
performing notarial marriage on affidavit. This kind of conduct on the part of
the concerned Shri B.P. Patel, Notary, Rewa, M.P. needs thorough
investigation that how Notaries (Public) are misusing their authority and
executing documents as proof of marriage.
Let this report be furnished by the Principal Secretary, Law and
Legislative Department or his competent subordinate officers as the case
may be within 30 days from today.
When we expressed our opinion that call details are admissible to
corroborate the memorandum (Ex.P-11) and Section 8 of the Evidence Act
deals with motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct which is
reflected from the call details, Shri Manish Kholia, learned counsel for the
appellant prays for withdrawal of I.A. No.24288/2025.
Accordingly, I.A. No.24288/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
bks
