High CourtsSingle Bench

Kanchan Jatav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 21 January 2026 · Citation: (2026) 01 MP CK 1802

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajesh Kumar Gupta, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 80, 85 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 55953 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 530 words

Rajesh Kumar Gupta, J

1.

This is the second application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.112/2025 registered at Police Station Dimni, District Morena (M.P.) for the commission of offence under Sections 80 and 85, 3(5) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2.

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the deceased Monika was found to be dead by hanging under unnatural circumstances and therefore, the offences in question have been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused on the basis of the statements of the family members of the deceased.

3.

The counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody since 18.08.2025. After conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. It is further argued that a suicide note has been recovered by the police. The aforesaid suicide note was sent for forensic examination and hand writing expert opinion and it was found to be written by the deceased herself. In the aforesaid suicide note, the deceased and specifical said that the present applicant along with other in-laws are not responsible for her death, therefore, no case is made out against the present applicant. The applicant is permanent resident of District Morena (M.P.) and there is no possibility of her absconding or tempering with prosecution case. Under these grounds, counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent as well as counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection.

5.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

6.

Taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the alleged dying declaration, but without expressing any opinion on 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 in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Committal Court.

7.

This order will remain operative 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/her;

ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation /trial, as the case may be;

iii) The applicant will not indulge himself /herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such acts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

iv) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future.

v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

8.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.