[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Priya Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28424
1 MCRC-14921-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 10th OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14921 of 2026
PRIYA SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Rakesh Singh - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Amit Pandey - Panel Lawyer 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.1003/2025 registered at Police Station Rampur
Baghelan, District Satna, for the offence punishable under Sections 296(a),
115(2), 351(3), 118(2) and 117(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the basic case
was registered under Sections 115(2), 296(a), 3(5) and 351(3) of the BNS,
but thereafter, the police has enhanced the offence alleging that an offence
under Sections 118(2) and 117(2) of the BNS was committed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that as per the
prosecution case, on 17.11.2025 at about 08:00 pm, the complainant Chitra
Singh along with her husband Raghvendra Singh was irrigating the field,
where her brother-in-law Sukhendra Singh, was forcefully ploughing the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28424
2 MCRC-14921-2026
field. When they took an objection, Sukhendra Singh, Pramila Singh, Priya
Singh and Shubham Singh started abusing the complainant's husband and
also assaulted him by danda. In the meanwhile, the complainant's son Bipin
Singh and daughter Veena Singh came there to rescue their father and on
that, all the four accused persons ran away from the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that as per
medical examination, the complainant Chitra Singh has suffered the simple
injury whereas her husband Raghvendra Singh has suffered grievous injury,
but no case under Sections 118(2) and 117(2) of the BNS is made out. He has
submitted that basically the offence was bailable one, but the police has
converted it into a non-bailable offence. Hence, the applicant, being an
unmarried girl aged about 20 years, be granted the benefit of anticipatory
bail.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the
anticipatory bail application and submitted that as per medical report of
Raghvendra, he suffered grievous injury and the same was dangerous to life,
hence, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.
6. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
7. In this case, the allegation against the accused persons is that they
assaulted the complainant and her husband with danda, hand and fist. The
allegation, particularly against this applicant, is that she assaulted the victim
party with hand and fist. Without propounding any principle, generally a
danda is not treated as a life endangering weapon unless some other
substance is added or it is modified.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28424
3 MCRC-14921-2026
8. Looking to the aforesaid factual aspects of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. Thus, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
9. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be
enlarged on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to
the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/trial Court for her appearance before
the concerned during the course of investigation or during trial Court, as the
case may be.
10. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by all the
conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
11. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
dm
