Anticipatory bail is denied when specific allegations are serious, and the applicant fails to comply with previous court orders.

ORDER

This is the second application filed by the applicants under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023, for the grant of anticipatory bail.

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant No.2 Nidhi Tomar has been arrested and she has been extended the benefit of regular bail, therefore, this application for anticipatory bail on her behalf has become infructuous and it be dismissed as such.

Hence, at the request of counsel for the applicants, this application stands partly rejected so far as applicant No. 2, Nidhi Tomar, is concerned.

Heard on I.A.No.4161 of 2025, filed under Section 301(2) of Cr. P.C. for permission to assist PP in the matter.

For the reasons mentioned therein, the application is allowed, and Shri Vivek Kumar Mishra, Advocate, and his associates are permitted to assist PP in the matter.

The applicant no.1 Sapna Tomar (Rajawat) is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.312/2023 registered at Police Station Gole Ka Mandir, District Gwalior, for offence under Sections 294, 323, 452, 365, 147, 148, 149, 379 and 364A of IPC and under Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.

The prosecution's story, in short, is that the complainant, Shiromani, went to the police station and orally reported that her daughter-in-law, namely Sapna Tomar, on 13.5.2023, filed a complaint before Mahila Thana, Gwalior, stating that on 29.4.2023, family members of the complainant came and invaded the house. On 30.5.2023, both parties had talked to Sapna's father, Ravindra Singh Tomar, and uncle Narendra Singh Kushwah about holding a social meeting on 31.5.2023 for compromise. Thereafter, at the time of the incident, present applicants, along with other co-accused persons, came to his house and started beating the complainant, Shiromani. When his son Kuldeep came to save them, he was also beaten with sticks. Thereafter, when his wife, Pushpa, came, Sapna and her sister, Nidhi Tomar, beat his wife and trespassed his house and took the complainant Shiromani along with his son and left them at Rachhed Ambah. Thereafter, with the help of police, the complainant and his son came back to his house, and they got the information from his neighbours to the effect that Sapna's mother, Seema Tomar, and other accused persons came to his house and they stole valuable documents and mobile phones. Accordingly, an offence has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant, No.1 Sapna Tomar, is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this matter. Her earlier application for anticipatory bail has been dismissed as withdrawn, but thereafter, in similar circumstances, co-accused Seema Tomar and others have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 01.04.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.No.14338 of 2025. Due to the old enmity regarding marital dispute, the applicant has been falsely roped into the matter. Additional statement of complainant party was recorded after 14 days, and they have changed their version, but nothing has been mentioned in the FIR regarding the offence of rape. Applicant is a permanent R/o District Gwalior. She is 27 years old and a housewife. The conclusion of the trial will take a considerable time. Learned counsel further submits that the a coordinate Bench of this court in M.Cr.C.no.42245 of 2024 has extended the benefit of anticipatory bail vide order dated 7th February, 2025. Hence, he prays that the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail.

5 . Per contra, learned PP for the respondent/State opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection by submitting that earlier bail application of the applicant has already been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to surrender before the trial court but the applicant has not complied with the aforesaid liberty and hence, she is not entitled for any relief. It is also argued that in the light of Section 5(1) of the MPDVPK Act, the application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable.

6. Both parties are heard at length and peruse the cas