[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhawna vs Gaurishankar on 2 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3164
1 MCRC-56659-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 2 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56659 of 2025
BHAWNA
Versus
GAURISHANKAR
Appearance:
Shri Rishiraj Trivedi, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Padmnabh Saxena, Advocate for the respondent [OBJ].
ORDER
This first application has been filed by applicant under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023/438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of
anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.279/2025, registered vide
RCT No.279 of 2025 arising out of cognizance on a private complaint for
offence punishable under Sections 448, 380, 420, 467, 468 and 471/34 of
IPC. The applicant is apprehending her arrest in the matter.
Heard the arguments.
Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application and the
relevant material on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds
mentioned in the application, submits that applicant - Bhawna was married to
the complainant/respondent in the year 1978. After matrimonial discord,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3164
2 MCRC-56659-2025
applicant is residing separately since 01.02.2015. There were certain
litigation between the applicant and the complainant regarding maintenance
and domestic violence. It is falsely alleged that the applicant entered the
house of complainant and stolen his cheque book. There is no evidence that
applicant is maker of forged cheques. The hand-writing expert report was not
proved before the trial Court. Learned trial Court had committed error in
taking cognizance for offence punishable under Sections 448, 380, 420, 467,
468 and 471/34 of IPC merely on the bald allegation of complainant
recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., without verifying prima-
facie authenticity of the allegation. Her complicity in the alleged offence is
not made out. The applicant enjoys good character and social standing. The
applicant is aged around 65 years. She is a home-maker by profession. No
criminal antecedents is reported against the applicant. Jail incarceration on
false accusation would cause hardship to the applicant and family. He is
ready to cooperate in investigation. Therefore, applicant may be extended the
benefit of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/complainant opposes
the anticipatory bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence.
Learned counsel referring to the summoning order dated 30.01.2025 submits
that the learned Judicial Magistrate on consideration of the complaint and the
material submitted alongwith the complaint including the hand-writing
expert reports, committed no error in taking cognizance of relevant offences
against the applicant/accused Bhawna and her brother Anil Solanki. Learned
counsel submits that the applicant is beneficiary of the Cheques in question,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3164
3 MCRC-56659-2025
therefore, it can be inferred that she has forged the Cheques in question. The
applicant may not be extended benefit of anticipatory bail.
Considered.
As per the accusation on record, the complainant - Gaurishankar
Khinchi submitted a written complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First
Class inter alia alleging that on 22.09.2021, he went to participate in a
shivir on 01.10.2021. His son informed that his wife Bhawna and her brother
Anil went to his house so he returned home. The accused abused and
threatened to kill him. Later, when he searched his house, he came to know
that cash Rs.1,00,000/-, ATM Card and Blank Cheque books have been
stolen. He submitted a written complaint to the SHO of Industrial Area,
Ratlam(M.P.) and Manager of S.B.I. Certain Cheques were presented with
the Bank which bears his forged signature. The learned Magistrate examined
the complainant - Gaurishankar Khinchi(PW1), his daughter-in-law(PW2)
and his son(PW3). However, the hand-writing expert was not examined
before the trial Court. The applicant is apprehending arrest in the matter. The
contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot be
dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of prosecution and complicity
of the applicant will be determined after evidence in trial.
As informed, the applicant is aged around 65 years and is a home-
maker by profession. 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 any criminal antecedent,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3164
4 MCRC-56659-2025
there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with the evidence, influencing
the witness or interfering in the trial by the applicant. The incarceration of
applicant does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of trial. The grant
of anticipatory bail to the applicant will not cause prejudice to free, fair and
full trial. 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 -
Bhawna shall be released on bail in connection with Crime as mentioned in
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 Competent Court for 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 be available for investigation on direction of the Investigation Officer.
(1) vUos"k.kdrkZ iqfyl vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kkuqlkj vUos"k.k gsrq vkosnd miyC/k jgs गीA
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) vkosnd leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha करे गी ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha gksxkA
(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 nगीk] ftlls ,slk O;fDr ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky; ;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh dks izdV djus ls fuokfjr gkssA
(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 करे गीA
(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) fopkj.k ds nkSjku] mifLFkr xokgksa ls ijh{k.k ds laca/k esa vkosnd /kkjk 309 na-iz-la-@346 Hkkjrh;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3164
5 MCRC-56659-2025
ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa dk mfpr vuqikyu lqfuf'pr करे गीA
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 from 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.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
pn
