Sampobai Banjara vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

This is the first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the applicant for grant of bail. He has been arrested on 31.08.2025 by Police Station Maksudangarh, District Guna in connection with Crime No.142/2025, registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS.

As per prosecution story, on 21.08.2025, between 8:00 PM and 10:30 PM, the deceased Kailash Banjara was alone at home with his wife Sampobai (present applicant). After a quarrel, both went to the cattle shed, where Sampobai (present applicant) strangulated Kailash with a rope used for tying cattle, causing his death. Blood was seen coming from both ears of the deceased and marks were found on his neck. Sampobai (present applicant) refused to get the post-mortem conducted and later confessed before family members and villagers that she had killed her husband. On the information of Kailash’s brother Pooran Banjara, Merg No. 0/25 dated 27.08.2025 was registered, and Kailash was declared dead by a doctor while being taken for treatment.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the entire prosecution case is based on an alleged extra-judicial confession, which is a weak piece of evidence and requires strict corroboration, but no independent and reliable evidence is available on record to support the same. It is further submitted that no post-mortem examination was conducted and, therefore, the exact cause of death has not been medically established. In the absence of medical evidence, the allegation of homicidal death remains doubtful.

It is further submitted that the applicant is a woman and the wife of the deceased, belonging to a rural background, and the alleged confession was made under pressure and influence of family members and villagers. There is no recovery of any incriminating article at the instance of the applicant, nor is there any direct eyewitness to the alleged incident. It is also submitted that there are material contradictions and inconsistencies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, and the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution do not form a complete and unbroken chain pointing only towards the guilt of the applicant. It is further submitted that the co-accused Pradeep Bhargava has already been granted bail by this Court on 22.09.2025 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 43230 of 2025. Trial will take time for its conclusion. The applicant is permanent resident of District Guna and there is no likelihood of her absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. She is ready and willing to abide by any terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court. With these submissions, a prayer for grant of bail is made.

Conversely, learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the application, praying for its rejection, looking to the nature and gravity of offence.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegations, coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in 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 merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on 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 Court/committal Court for her appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court, subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her;

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

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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically, without further reference to the Bench;

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

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

Certified copy as per rules.