SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 593

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mahesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Manish Kumar Vijaywargiya,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 13 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 17625 of 2025

MAHESH SHARMA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Manish Kumar Vijaywargiya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Sunit Kapoor, Govt. Advocate for the respondent No.1/State.

Shri Unnit Jhanjhari, Advocates for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

ORDER complainant had reported to the Court that during her evidence on 06.11.2023, accused Dhan Singh has threatened her. The trial Court warned Dhansingh not to speak or threaten the complaint. It goes to show that the respondent/accused Dhansingh attempted to influence and threaten the witness. Learned counsel further referred to the FIR at Crime No.233/2023 registered at P.S. Khilchipur, District - Rajgarh(Biaora)(M.P.) by Shrinath Sharma that the witnesses were threatened by Dhan Singh and Subash Sharma. Learned counsel also referred to FIR at Crime No.114/2025 registered at P.S. Khilchipur, District Rajgarh(Biaora) (M.P.) lodged by petitioner - Mahesh regarding threatening and assault by Subash Sharma to him and his wife over previous dispute. Therefore, the bail granted

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top