[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Pushpadevi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27078
1 MCRC-14007-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 7 th OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14007 of 2026
SMT. PUSHPADEVI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Vishal Vincent Rajendra Daniel - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Naveen Thakur - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in connection
with Crime No.126/2026 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Tikamgarh
(M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is an allegation
that the applicant, along with other family members, was quarreling over
possession of the joint family agricultural land and they have also not given the
possession of the land attached to the house. Due to this, on being harassed by the
applicant, the deceased committed suicide. Further submitted that, according to the
document dated 17.06.2021, the Tahsildar of Tikamgarh passed a partition order.
In this order, the applicant and his sons were given a 1/3 share. Another 1/3 share
was given to Janki (widow of Dibia) and Vrandvan Ahirwar. The remaining 1/3
share was given to Harbu Bai (wife of Fulliram), Ramdeen, Pushpendra (son of
Fulliram), and Geeta (daughter of Fulliram) and from the order dated 17.06.2021,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27078
2 MCRC-14007-2026
it is also clear that family partition was made. Thus, it could not be said that
victim's share was not decided and he was not knowing the legal proceeding, if he
was not given possession of the land, he was competent to apply before the
revenue officials but he has not initiated any legal proceedings and as per the video
recovered from the mobile phone of the deceased, it is alleged that the applicant
along with her family members harassed the victim and was not given share and
due to that the victim has committed suicide.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that from the merg
intimation, it is clear that it was reported by Ramdeen real brother of the applicant
and in that he has clearly mentioned that Pushpendra's wife was in her parental
house and he has committed suicide at 06:00 AM in the morning and the ground of
suicide was mentioned by him that his expenditure were more than his income and
due that in sudden impulse, he has committed suicide. After that on 07.03.2026,
this FIR has been registered nearabout after 4 months. The applicant is a woman.
Hence, the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State has oppose the bail application and
submitted that the suicide note recovered, in the from of video from the mobile of
the deceased, there is clear allegation against the applicant. Hence, the applicant is
not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
5. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Looking to the factual aspect that to abetment, the ingredients of Section
107 of IPC/ 45 of the BNS must be fulfilled and only on the basis that the deceased
was being harassed, it cannot be presumed that the applicant abeted the suicide,
this Court deems it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
7. It is directed that in the event of arrest the applicant shall be enlarged on
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27078
3 MCRC-14007-2026
bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Arresting Officer for her appearance before him during the course of
investigation or before the trial Court concerned during trial, as the case may be.
8. The applicant is directed to cooperate with the investigating agency and
also appear on the date and time directed by the Investigating Officer.
9. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly induce or threaten any
prosecution witness.
10. The applicant will regularly appear before the trial Court and cooperate
till disposal of this case.
11. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions as
enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
12. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
VB*
