[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sandeep Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13130
1 MCRC-4416-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 13th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4416 of 2026
SANDEEP VERMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Mayank Sharma -
Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Gauri Pathak - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
This is the fourth application filed by the applicant under Section 483
o f Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 for grant of regular bail
relating to FIR/Crime No.209/2025 registered at Police Station-Mandi,
District-Sehore (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS.
The applicant is in custody since 24.05.2025. Earlier bail application was
dismissed on merits vide order dated 22.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.
No.46165 of 2025.
2. Learned senior counsel for the applicant has submitted that the
deceased's children namely Ansu (PW-2), Anshika (PW-3) have not
supported the prosecution case. Ritesh Verma (PW-8) has already been
examined, Aman Verma has been given up and Dipesh Verma has not been
cited as a prosecution witness. Sunita Vetwal has also been examined.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13130
2 MCRC-4416-2026
3. Learned senior counsel for the applicant has further submitted that
the children of the deceased, who were natural witnesses to the incident,
have not supported the prosecution case. It is also submitted that Ritesh
Verma, who is the brother of the deceased, has stated in his statement that he
was not present on the spot at the time of incident. No previous report was
lodged, no external injuries were found on the body of the deceased when
the body was sent for autopsy. Looking to the factual aspects of the case, the
applicant be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and
submitted that as per the statement of the prosecution witnesses, they have
clearly stated that the applicant used to harass the deceased after consuming
alcohol. On the date of the incident, when the applicant assaulted his child,
the deceased has taken the objection whereupon she was also assaulted.
Thereafter, the deceased committed suicide. This fact is also supported by
the statement of Rohit Verma, hence, no case of bail is made out.
5. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
6. From perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the deceased was married to
the applicant for about 18 years prior to her death. By her wedlock, they
have got two children namely Ansu (PW-2) and Anshika (PW-3). It is
alleged that the applicant used to assault the deceased but on the date of
suicide, the applicant has assaulted his son and when the deceased has taken
the objection, she was also assaulted. Thereafter, the deceased committed
suicide but no injuries were found either on the body of the son or on the
body of the deceased.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13130
3 MCRC-4416-2026
7. Looking to the factual aspects of the case coupled with the facts that
the material witnesses have been examined and no purpose would be served
in keeping the applicant behind the bars, this Court deems it appropriate to
enlarge the applicant on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the
merits of the case, the application is allowed.
8. It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his
furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may
be fixed by that Court in this regard during the pendency of trial.
9. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Section 480(3) of BNSS.
10. Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
HK
