High CourtsSingle Bench

Rohini Sahu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 1 December 2025 · Citation: (2025) 12 MP CK 1988

HON’BLE JUDGES
B. P. Sharma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482, 482(2) · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 105, 106 · Electricity Act, 2003 — Section 135
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 55564 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

10 paragraphs · 361 words

B. P. Sharma, J

1.

This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in relation to FIR/Crime No.158/2025 registered at Police Station Amdara, District Satna (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 105 of BNS, 2023 and Section 135 of Electricity Act.

2.

According to the prosecution, deceased Ramnaresh Sahu died due to electrocution. Consequently, an FIR was registered.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that an offence under Section 106 of BNS was initially registered against the applicant and accused was enlarged on bail by the concerned Investigating Officer. Thereafter, accused received a notice regarding filing of the charge-sheet for a non-bailable offence under Section 105 of the BNS before the competent Court. As such, there is apprehension of his arrest. It is further submitted that applicant is permanent resident of District Maihar (MP) and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tempering with the evidence. Applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4.

The counsel for the State has opposed the application for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

5.

Heard the submissions and perused the case diary.

6.

Looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it proper to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed.

7.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer/ Investigating Officer.

8.

It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Certified copy as per rules.