Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 October, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28990
1 MCRC-40047-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 6 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 40047 of 2025
RAHUL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Chandra Prakash Purohit advocate for the applicant.
Shri Santosh Singh Thakur public prosecutor for the State.
Mr. U.B. Rai, ASI of P.S. Industrial Area Ratlam present in person.
ORDER
This first application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 521 of 2025 registered
at Police Station - Industrial Area Ratlam, District - Ratlam (M.P.) for offence
punishable under Section 108 of BNS, 2023. Applicant is in judicial custody
since 2.7.2025.
2. Heard the arguments.
3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and
the relevant material on record.
4. 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.
Allegedly, there was a romantic relationship between applicant and deceased
which could not culminate into marriage. The deceased did not allege any
misdeed or instigation against the applicant in the suicide note. Learned counsel
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28990
2 MCRC-40047-2025
contends that there was no instigation or abetment or mensrea on the part of the
applicant for unfortunate suicide of Nikita. Learned counsel relied on the
judgments in 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 and Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra and
Others reported in 2020(SCC Online) SC 964 to buttress his contentions. He
further submits that the final report has been submitted on completion of
investigation. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the
applicant. Jail incarceration on false accusation would cause hardship to the
dependent family. He is ready to cooperate in the trial.
5. 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.
6. According to the material available on case diary, Nikita, aged around 33
years committed suicide by hanging at her home. She was pursuing M.Sc.
Nursing Course and teaching at Arogya College, Ratlam. It is alleged that
Nikita had love affair with Rahul Dhangar (applicant). There was
matrimonial discord between Rahul and his wife Nirmala. Nirmala had filed
a petition for divorce at Family Court, Ratlam. Rahul had promised to marry
Nikita after divorce with his wife. But the matter for divorce was amicably
settled between Rahul and Nirmala. They resumed matrimonial relations.
Rahul stopped communication with Nikita. Feeling disturbed and aggrieved
by conduct of Rahul, Nikita committed suicide. On such allegation, the P.S.
Industrial Area, Ratlam registered FIR for offence punishable under section
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28990
3 MCRC-40047-2025
108 of BNS 2023 against Rahul. Rahul was apprehended on 2.7.2025. He is
in custody ever since. The final report was submitted on completion of
investigation. The deceased did not allege any misdeed or harassment against
the applicant in the alleged suicide note recovered from the spot of the
incident. Further, prima facie, there is no allegation with regard to the
communication, much less, instigation by the applicant in close proximity of
death of Nikita. The veracity of prosecution will be determined after evidence
in the trial.
7. As informed, the applicant is aged around 30 years and is a teacher by
profession. He has the 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.
8. 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.
9. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant - Rahul shall be released on bail
in connection with the 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 solvent surety of the same amount to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28990
4 MCRC-40047-2025
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) आवेदक संबंिधत यायालय के िनदशानुसार सुनवाई क येक ितिथ पर उप थत रहे गा ।
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) आवेदक समान कृ ित का केाई अपराध नह ं करे गा या उसम स मिलत नह ं होगा ।
(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) आवेदक करण के त य से प रिचत कसी य को य या अ य प से लोभन, धमक
या वचन नह ं दे गा, जससे ऐसा य ऐसे त य को यायालय या पुिलस अिधकार को कट करने से
िनवा रत हो ।
(4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the evidence or
allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) आवेदक य या अ य प से सा य के साथ छे डछाड करने का या सा ी या सा य को
बहलाने -फुसलाने, दबाव डालने या धमकाने का यास नह ं करे गl ।
(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) वचारण के दौरान, उप थत गवाह से पर ण के संबंध म आवेदकगण धारा ३०९ दं. .सं. / ३४६
भारतीय नाग रक सुर ा सं हता, 2023 के ावधान का उिचत अनुपालन सुिन त करगे।
10. 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.
11. 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
BDJ
