Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narendra Goyal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 September, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1 CRA-3306-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 3306 of 2025
(NARENDRA GOYAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 10-09-2025
Shri Sushil Goswami - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri B.P.S. Chauhan - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/ State.
Heard on I.A.No.7133/2025, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.3- Shribati Bai @ Shrimati and appellant No.4 - Rashmi.
Appellants No. 3 & 4 are facing sentence by virtue of judgment dated
19th March, 2025 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind,
District-Bhind in S.T. No.63/2021 whereby appellants No.3 & 4 have been
convicted and sentenced as under:-
Section Imprisonment Fine Default in lieu thereof
304 B IPC LI 10,000/- 01 year's RI
498-A IPC 02 years' RI 5,000/- 06 months' RI
4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 02 years' RI 5,000/- 06 months' RI
It is the submission of counsel for appellant that the trial Court erred in
convicting and awarding jail sentence to present appellants. It is further
submitted that appellant No.4-Shrivati Bai is the mother-in-law of the
deceased and appellant No.4-Rashmi is the sister-in-law (जेठानी) of the
deceased and they both suffered 06 months' incarceration as pre and post trial
confinement. Infact, appellant No.4-Rashmi was granted the benefit of
anticipatory bail earlier. It is further submitted that both appellants were
falsely implicated in the case. They both were living separately. On the first
2 CRA-3306-2025
floor, deceased and her husband (co-accused Akash) were living with their
son and on the ground floor, parents-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law
were living together. Appellant No.4-Rashmi has one son aged about 08
years and all family members are behind the bar, therefore, her son is living
with his maternal-grand parents. Only omnibus allegations have been
levelled against present appellants. Besides that, fine amount has already
been deposited and appeal being of the year 2025 shall take time for final
hearing. Appellant No.4 remained on bail during trial and she did not misuse
the liberty so granted. Under such circumstances, bail may kindly be granted
to present appellants.
Learned counsel for the respondent/ State opposed the prayer and
submits that appellant No.3-Shrivati and appellant No.4-Rashmi specifically
played the role of harassment for dowry demand, which is reflected from the
evidence of the prosecution witnesses and within 14 months of marriage the
deceased committed suicide, which is very strange. He also refers one
photograph (Annexure A-2), which indicates that some members of the
family are hurling currency notes while appearing with the bride and bride-
groom in their wedding reception. Under such circumstances, learned
counsel prayed for dismissal of the application.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and
going through the evidence surfaced, it appears that no case is made out for
grant of bail to appellant No.3-Shrivati Bai as she was mother-in-law of the
deceased and specific allegations have been levelled against her. Therefore,
3 CRA-3306-2025
bail in respect of appellant No.3-Shrivati Bai stands rejected. However, so
far as appellant No.4-Rashmi is concerned, looking to the fact that appellant
No.4 is a lady aged about 33 years and is having a child aged about 08 years
and all the family members are behind the bar, therefore, in the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the case, this Court intends to allow the application I.A.
No.7133/2025 and it is directed that if appellant No.4-Rashmi furnishes a
bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along
with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court that she shall appear before the Principal Registry of this Court on
11/11/2025 and thereafter, on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed by
the Office for her appearance, then she shall be released on bail and
execution of jail sentence is suspended till disposal of this appeal, subject to
deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited. I.A.No.7133/2025 stands
disposed of, accordingly.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance and information.
Certified copy as per rules/directions.
(ANAND PATHAK) (PUSHPENDRA YADAV)
JUDGE JUDGE
VC
