Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Sangeeta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 September, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:24438
1 MCRC-33602-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 1 st OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 33602 of 2025
SMT. SANGEETA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Virendra Sharma senior advocate through VC with Shri Satish
Yadav, advocate for the applicant.
Shri Apoorv Joshi public prosecutor for the State.
ORDER
This first application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 294/2025
registered at Police Station - Neelganga District - Ujjain (M.P.) for offence
punishable under Sections 108, 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
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
merely for the reason that she is sister of Shikha. Learned counsel referring to the
FIR at crime No. 132/2025 dated 16.03.2025 submits that Rekha Chouhan,
mother of Shikha, had lodged FIR with regard to assault and manhandling by the
Bhanu with her daughter Shikha, who was living in relationship with Bhanu for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:24438
2 MCRC-33602-2025
almost two years. When their relationship turned sour, Shikha went to her
parental home. There is no allegation of instigation or abetment in close
proximity of alleged suicide of Bhanu by the applicant. Learned counsel referring
to judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan
Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2021)2 SCC 427,
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 Bhanu. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is
married and living with her husband at a different place. She did not
communicate with Bhanu. Applicant enjoys good character and social standing.
The custodial interrogation of the applicant is not needed in the matter. Jail
incarceration on false accusation would cause hardship to the applicant. She is
ready to cooperate in investigation. Therefore, applicant may be extended the
benefit of anticipatory bail.
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.
According to the material available on case diary, Bhanu Kulpare had
committed suicide by hanging at his home on 14.05.2025. The medical officer,
on postmortem examination, reported that Bhanu has died due to asphyxia as a
result of antemortem hanging. One handwritten note and video recorded in mobile
phone of Bhanu was recovered, wherein Bhanu alleged that Siddhi @ Shikha and
her family members are responsible for his death. Siddhi @ Shikha and her family
members are demanding Rs. 25 Lacs and threatening to implicate him in rape
case. He is committing suicide due to harassment of Shikha @ Siddhi and her
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:24438
3 MCRC-33602-2025
family members. The material on record also shows that Shikha @ Siddhi was
living in relationship with Bhanu for last 2 years. Their relationship was
estranged. The mother of Shikha, Rekha had lodged FIR against Bhanu for
assaulting Shikha with iron pipe on 16.03.2025. The material on case diary does
not show direct communication between the applicant and deceased Bhanu. The
veracity of prosecution will be determined after evidence in the trial.
As informed, applicant is aged 37 years. She is a homemaker and earns
livelihood by stitching work. Considering the age, profession and status of the
applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of fleeing from justice or involving in
any criminal activity. In absence of criminal antecedents, considering the socio-
economic status of the applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of tampering
with the evidence, influencing the witness or interfering in the investigation by
the applicant. The incarceration of applicant does not appear to be necessary for
the purpose of investigation. The grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant will
not cause prejudice to free, fair and full investigation. Considering her clean past,
age, status and profession, the applicant may suffer hardship and prejudice due to
incarceration entailing social disrepute and humiliation. Considering the overall
circumstances of the case, but without commenting on merits of the accusation,
this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Thus, the
application is allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant-Smt. Sangeeta
shall be released on bail in connection with Crime as mentioned in the first
paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the officer making arrest/the Competent Court for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:24438
4 MCRC-33602-2025
compliance with the following conditions:(For the convenience of understanding
by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are reproduced in Hindi as under):-
1) Applicant shall make himself available for investigation as may be directed by the Investigation Officer.
(1) vUos"k.kdrkZ iqfyl vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kkuqlkj vUos"k.k gsrq vkosnd miyC/k jgs xhA
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) vkosnd leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxh ;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) vkosnd izdj.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) vkosnd 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 the
BNSS. regarding examination of witnesses in attendance;
(5) वचारण के दौरान, उप थत गवाह से पर ण के संबंध म आवेदक धारा ३०९ दं . .सं./ ३४६ भारतीय नाग रक सुर ा सं हता, 2023 के ावधान
का उिचत अनुपालन सुिन त करे xh ।
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 Investigation Officer /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 had explained the
conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
BDJ
