[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Jyoti Kaurav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8357
1 MCRC-11125-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 10 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11125 of 2026
SMT. JYOTI KAURAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shir Ravi Dwivedi - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Manish Saxena - GA for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is the second bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483
of the BNSS seeking grant of bail.
The applicant was arrested on 10.09.2024 in connection with Crime No.
107/2024 registered at Police Station Utila, District Gwalior, for offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
As per the prosecution story, the applicant/accused, along with co-accused
Surendra Kaurav, allegedly caused struggle injuries to the deceased and, with the
intention to kill him, crushed his head with a stone, resulting in his death.
Thereafter, in order to conceal the evidence of the offence, the body of the
deceased was thrown into a well situated near the place of occurrence. On this
basis, Police Station Utila registered the First Information Report on 07.09.2024
as Crime No. 107/2024 under Sections 103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no direct or
indirect connection with the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8357
2 MCRC-11125-2026
case due to malice. It is submitted that she has not committed any offence. It is
further submitted that the applicant is the wife of the deceased and the allegation
that she conspired in the murder of her husband is false and baseless. The FIR was
initially registered against unknown persons and the applicant has no criminal
antecedents.
It is also submitted that the applicant has been in continuous judicial
custody since 10.09.2024. The investigation in the case has been completed and
the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. The applicant is a
27-year-old woman and the mother of a minor child who requires her care and
affection. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a permanent
resident of District Datia (M.P.) and there is no likelihood of her absconding or
tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to abide by all the
conditions imposed by the Court and is also ready to furnish adequate bail. With
the aforesaid submissions, a prayer for grant of bail has been made.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail
application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of
allegations, and the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future,
and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this
Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this
application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon
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 Trial
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8357
3 MCRC-11125-2026
Court/Committal Court for her appearance on the dates fixed by the concerned
Court.
This order shall remain operative subject to compliance with the following
conditions by the applicant:
The applicant shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond
executed by her.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be.
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly extend any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer.
The applicant shall not commit any other offence during the pendency of
the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without
further reference to this Court.
The applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial.
The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial
Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
(aspr)
