IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 15 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2013 of 2026

SURESH BANSHKAR

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearance:

Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Kalpana Parmar - Public Prosecutor for the State.

ORDER Devendra and her parents-in-law, due to which Muskan remained distressed. On the day of the incident also, when Muskan expressed her desire to go to her parental home, a quarrel took place with her husband Devendra, mother-in-law Krishnabai and father-in-law Suresh (present applicant), and the said persons assaulted the deceased. Being harassed and troubled due to the said acts, Muskan consumed some substance, as a result of which her health deteriorated and she died. Upon completion of the entire investigation, alleged crime was registered against the co-accused persons.

This is the first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the

applicant for grant of bail. He has been arrested on 02.12.2025 by Police Station Bahadurpur, District Ashoknagar in connection with Crime No.320 of 2025 registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 108, 85, 3(5)

of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

As per prosecution story, the informant Ward Boy Manoj Balu gave

information on 02.11.2025 at Police Outpost Hospital Ashoknagar regarding a deceased female patient who had been brought after consuming some unknown substance. On the basis of the said information, a Marg intimation No.116/25 under Section 194 BNSS was recorded at Police Outpost Hospital Ashoknagar, and on the said intimation, actual Marg No. 61/25 under Section 194 BNSS was registered at Police Station Bahadurpur and Marg inquiry was taken up. During the course of Marg inquiry, the statements of the deceased’s father Bablu Banshkar and mother Anita Bai Banshkar were recorded. In their statements, they stated that the deceased Muskan was not allowed to visit her parental home by her husband

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased and has been roped in only on the basis of omnibus and general allegations, without any specific overt act attributed to him.

Counsel further submits that the entire prosecution case is based solely on the statements of the parents of the deceased, who are interested witnesses, and there is no independent or corroborative evidence to support the allegations of harassment or assault by the applicant. It is contended that no prior complaint was ever made by the deceased against the applicant during her lifetime. It is further submitted that the alleged incident arose out of a domestic dispute, and there is no material on record to establish that the applicant intentionally abetted or instigated the deceased to consume any poisonous substance. The essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 02.12.2025, the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent court; hence, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Continued detention of the applicant would amount to pre-trial punishment. It is further submitted that trial will take time for its conclusion and the applicant is permanent resident of District Ashoknagar and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made out.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection looking to the nature and gravity of offence.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the tri