[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Edal Singh Kansana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8416
1 MCRC-11410-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 11th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11410 of 2026
EDAL SINGH KANSANA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Manish Saxena - Public Prosecutor for the State.
ORDER
This is the first application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by the applicant seeking grant of anticipatory
bail in connection with Crime No.88 of 2026 registered at Police Station
Morar, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 108
of BNS, 2023.
As per the case of the prosecution, on 15.09.2025 at about 08:30 AM,
Ramesh Singh Parmar consumed a poisonous substance. During treatment,
he died at around 11:40 AM at Jayarogya Hospital. In this regard, Marg No.
51/2025 under Section 194 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita was
registered and an inquiry was initiated. During the course of the inquiry, a
handwritten note of the deceased Ramesh Singh Parmar was recovered. In
the said note, it was mentioned that Yogesh alias Yogendra, Sonu Pandit,
D.D. Sharma, Edal Singh Kansana (present applicant), Ankit Gurjar, Bunty
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8416
2 MCRC-11410-2026
Sharma, and Sanjeev Gurjar had been harassing the deceased for the
recovery of a loan. On the basis of the contents of the said note, all the
above-named persons were implicated and arrayed as accused in the present
case.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant
has not committed any offence as alleged and has no role in the incident in
question. It is further submitted that the allegations made against the
applicant are vague and omnibus in nature and no specific act of instigation
or intentional aid has been attributed to him which could attract the offence
alleged. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecution case is
primarily based upon a letter allegedly written by the deceased; however, the
contents of the said letter do not disclose any direct or proximate act on the
part of the applicant which could be said to have driven the deceased to
commit suicide. Mere allegation of harassment for recovery of loan does not
constitute abetment of suicide in the absence of any specific act of
instigation, provocation or active participation on the part of the applicant. It
is further submitted that as per the statements of the children of the deceased
recorded during the investigation, the alleged threat was extended by the
applicant to the children and not to the deceased himself. Therefore, there is
no material to indicate that the applicant had directly threatened or instigated
the deceased to commit suicide. The applicant is ready and willing to
cooperate with the investigation and abide by all conditions that may be
imposed by this Court. Accordingly, anticipatory bail is sought.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8416
3 MCRC-11410-2026
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as the
counsel for the complainant opposed the application and prayed for its
rejection by contending that looking to the nature and gravity of offence, no
case for anticipatory bail is made out.
Considering the overall facts and cirrcumstances of the case, as well as
the fact that the material placed on record does not disclose the possibility of
the applicant fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit
of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, this Court, without
commenting on the merits of the case, is of the opinion that the applicant
deserves to be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this
application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant
shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to
compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and
conditions of the bond executed by him;
ii) The applicant will cooperate in the
investigation/trial, as the case may be;
iii) The applicant will not indulge herself in extending
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case
may be;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8416
4 MCRC-11410-2026
vi) The applicant will not seek unnecessary
adjournments during the trial;
v) The applicant will not leave India without previous
permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case
may be.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
