Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr. Abhijit Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
1 MCRC-22396-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 6 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 22396 of 2025
DR. ABHIJIT PANDEY
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Shashank Shekhar Dugwekar - Senior Advocate with Shri Himanshu
Mishra - Advocate and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh - Advocate for the
applicant.
Shri Anurag Gohil - Advocate for objector.
Shri Kabeer Paul - Advocate and Shri Aayush Tiwari- Advocate for
objector.
Shri C.M. Tiwari - Government Advocate for State.
ORDER
In compliance of order dated 26.09.2025, learned Senior Advocate for
the applicant has amended the date of arrest of the applicant in the memo of
petition.
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
BNSS for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.105/2025 registered at
Police Station - Shahpura, District - Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable
under Sections 108, 80 of BNS and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act. The applicant has been arrested on 25.03.2025.
2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that applicant has harassed
the deceased mentally and physically and he also demanded dowry due to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
2 MCRC-22396-2025
which she committed suicide. On the basis of which, offence has been
registered against present applicant under the aforesaid section.
3. Learned Senior Advocate for the applicant submits that applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody since
25.03.2025. Applicant and his wife Richa (deceased) both were doctors and
they have mutual relationship over 1.5 years and married on 04.12.2024.
Prior to the alleged incident i.e. 21.03.2025, no complaint regarding
harassment has been made by the deceased or her family members. Deceased
Dr. Richa had suspicion about illicit relationship between applicant and his
worker Mahi@Sapna and WhatsApp chats between the couple from show
marital discord. Even if, there is extra-marital affair between them, then also
it will not amount to abetment. Deceased had sent her mobile PIN code -
1470 to her brother on 21.03.2025 at 12:23 am. Suicide note's detailed
financial instructions and the PIN code sent to the brother of the deceased
indicate premeditation, suggesting that the deceased's actions were planned
rather than an impulsive response to any alleged instigation by the applicant.
Deceased uncle Prakash K. Pandey and her aunt Rani Pandey were also
present on the place of incident and they took the deceased to the hospital in
their car and at that time also they have not made any complaint against the
applicant. It is further submitted that in response to the query made by the
Police, Director Incharge - Medicolegal Institute Bhopal (M.P.) has stated
that injury of prick marks is due to injection and it is possible that it has come
from a needle and it can be caused by self-injecting. The deceased committed
suicide inside her room and at the date of incident, door of the room was
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
3 MCRC-22396-2025
broken in front of applicant, Sudhir Kumar Gupta (President of the society),
Jamna Prasad Meena (Lock breaker) and Raman Choudhary (Guard).
Statement of Sudhir Kumar Gupta and Jamna Prasad Meena was recorded on
27.03.2025 and statement of Raman Choudhary was recorded on 30.03.2025.
Statement of Sapna@Mahi was recorded on 04.04.2025. Statement of
mother, father and brother of the deceased was recorded on 24.03.2025 in
which they have not stated regarding harassment and demand of dowry. It is
further submitted that when the learned trial Court dismissed the bail
application of the applicant, first time allegation of demand of dowry and
harassment was levelled against the applicant. Statements of deceased's uncle
and aunt were recorded on 07.04.2025 in which they have first time made
allegation of harassment and demand of dowry. Supplementary statement of
father and mother of the deceased was recorded on 04.05.2025 in which they
have alleged that deceased was subjected to demand of dowry. WhatsApp
chats are also available on record which shows that applicant has never
abetted the deceased to commit suicide and there is no demand of dowry.
Reliance has been placed in the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in
K.V. Prakash Babu Vs. State of Karnataka (2017) 11 SCC 176 . Charge-sheet
has been filed and conclusion of trial will take considerable time, therefore, it
is prayed that applicant may be released on regular bail.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as counsel of the
objector vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that there
was illicit relationship between the applicant and his worker Sapna@Mahi.
On the body of the deceased injuries were found which corroborate the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
4 MCRC-22396-2025
allegations of physical abuse and there was injury on the scalp at the back of
the head. Postmortem report shows injury on the body of deceased which
confirms that deceased did not commit suicide but that it was a homicidal
death. It is submitted that statements of deceased's mother Renu Pandey, her
father Vinod Pandey and her brother Himanshu Pandey have been recorded
on 24.03.2025, in which they have stated that due to illicit relationship
between applicant and Sapna@Mahi, applicant used to harass the deceased.
It is also submitted that deceased's uncle Prakash Pandey and her aunt Rani
Pandey also lived in Bhopal and deceased used to tell them about illicit
relationship of applicant and Sapna@Mahi. Deceased died on 21.03.2025,
her last rites rituals and trayodashi sanskar (thirteenth day ceremony) was
performed in Uttar Pradesh on 03.04.2025 and after performing the said
rituals when deceased's uncle and aunt returned back to Bhopal, their
statements were recorded on 07.04.2025 hence, there is no delay in recording
their statements. Statement of independent witness - Randeep Pathak was
recorded on 07.04.2025 in which he has stated that applicant and
Sapna@Mahi were having illicit relationship and applicant used to harass the
deceased due to which deceased committed suicide. It is further submitted
that clinic of applicant was rented in the name of his worker Sapna@Mahi.
Even in shop/clinic registration, name of Sapna@Mahi is mentioned as
Manager. Whatsapp chat of deceased and applicant shows that there was
dispute between them regarding illicit relationship between applicant and
Sapna@Mahi as well as in suicide note, deceased has written that "be happy
with Mahi". It is also submitted that Sudhir Gupta, Jamna and Raman
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
5 MCRC-22396-2025
Choudhary in their statement has stated that they have told the applicant to
take the deceased to Hospital. Applicant who is the husband of the deceased
and even being a Doctor had not provided any first-aid to her wife/deceased.
Pictures and videos are also available on record which shows that applicant
had immediately not taken the deceased to the hospital rather he was
searching something in the room where incident took place. Such act of
applicant shows his conduct which is very unnatural. In this case, learned
trial Court has also framed charges under Section 302 of IPC. It is also
submitted that Police has not investigated the present case properly. Map and
crime scene are not prepared. There are two doors in the room of the
deceased therefore there is a possibility that applicant came from another
door and injected the deceased due to which she died. When deceased
committed suicide, applicant had called Mahi at around 9:00 pm and
informed her about the incident and he did not take the deceased to the
hospital till 09:50 pm. It is also submitted that lady named Sapna@Mahi has
not even been investigated properly she has not confronted with the applicant
and the forensic report of the mobile phone have not been analyzed and CDR
has not been obtained. The incident occurred within three and a half months
of the marriage. There is criminal record of the applicant under Sections 420,
465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC but the applicant failed to disclose the
same which shows that applicant has not come with clean hands. Reliance
has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar
Yadav Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2018) 12 SCC 129.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50362
6 MCRC-22396-2025
6. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and
seriousness of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the
applicant.
7. Accordingly, this MCRC stands dismissed.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
shahina
