IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR

th

ON THE 19 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 58903 of 2025 AJAY Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri C.L. Yadav - Senior Advocate along with Shri Omprakash Solanki, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Romil Verma- GA appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-

1].

Shri Shubham Dholpure, Advocate for the respondent [OBJ].

ORDER

1] They are heard and perused the case diary.

2] This is the applicant's first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of Cr.P.C. as he is implicated in connection with Crime No.413/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line Dewas, District- Dewas (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 80(2), 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant is in custody since 08.08.2025.

3] The allegation against the applicant is of dowry death, as the wife of the applicant committed suicide by consuming a poisonous substance.

4] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the charges have already been framed on 7/11/2025 and that the applicant is lodged in jail since 8.8.2025, and the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he is a soft engineer having done his MCA also, and it was the second marriage of both the applicant and the deceased/Nupurnath.

5] Counsel for the applicant has also submitted that there was a minor difference regarding the use of a bed and an almirah, which was earlier used by the first wife of the applicant, and to purchase a new almirah and bed father of the deceased had transferred Rupees forty-five thousand to the deceased on her mobile phone. However, it is alleged that the said amount was used by the family members of the applicant towards some other expenses. It is further submitted that the deceased also had an abortion in the month of January, 2025, because of which she was depressed. Thus, the bail application of the applicant be allowed.

6] Counsel for the respondent/State, as also the objector, have opposed the prayer, and it is submitted that the deceased had also suffered a head injury, which is also apparent from the documents of the hospital.

7] Counsel for the respondent State has also drawn the attention of this Court to whatsapp chat in the private group of the sisters of the deceased, in which the deceased had also shared the photographs of the bed and almirah, and that the deceased had also informed her sisters that she was being treated as a servant in the house. Thus, no case for grant of bail is made out.

8] Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary and the material available on record, this court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail. However, the applicant can renew his prayer after the elder sister of the deceased Sunita Yogi, and the independent witness/Smt. Varsha W/o Ashok Rane are examined in the trial Court or after six months, whichever is earlier.

9] With the aforesaid liberty, the MCRC is dismissed.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)

JUDGE das