The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a criminal appeal seeking bail in a case involving allegations of abetment of suicide under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Court held that the material collected during the investigation, including WhatsApp messages allegedly sent by the deceased shortly before his death and statements of close family members, disclosed a strong prima facie case at the present stage.
Background of the Case
The appeal was filed by Dharmendra and other accused challenging the order of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Dhar, dated June 30, 2026, which had rejected their application for bail.
According to the prosecution, the deceased, Santosh alias Lakhan, allegedly faced repeated threats, abuse, and harassment from the accused over an old agricultural land dispute. During the investigation, police recorded statements of the deceased's father and brother, who claimed that the deceased had been subjected to continuous intimidation. The prosecution further relied on a WhatsApp message allegedly sent by the deceased shortly before his death, which mentioned the names of the accused.
Arguments Before the Court
Counsel for the appellants argued that they had been falsely implicated because of previous enmity. It was submitted that the prosecution story contained inconsistencies, particularly regarding the WhatsApp messages. The defence also pointed out that the Customer Application Form (CAF) relating to the mobile connection had not been filed with the charge sheet, and no documentary evidence had been produced to establish the alleged land dispute.
The appellants further contended that the mobile phone panchnama suggested friendly relations between one of the accused and the deceased, making the prosecution's allegations doubtful. They also submitted that they were permanent residents of Dhar district, had no intention of absconding, and were willing to cooperate with the trial.
Court's Observations
Justice Jai Kumar Pillai noted that while considering an appeal against rejection of bail under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act, the Court's role is limited to examining whether the lower court's decision was justified on the available material.
After examining the case diary, the Court referred to the post-mortem report, witness statements and the WhatsApp messages recovered during the investigation. The Court observed that the messages allegedly sent shortly before the death specifically named the appellants and formed an important piece of material relied upon by the prosecution at this stage.
The Bench observed:
“At the stage of considering a bail application, the court is not required to conduct a mini-trial or weigh the evidence meticulously.”
The Court further noted that the objections raised by the defence regarding the electronic evidence, the absence of land dispute documents, and other factual disputes are matters that must be examined during the trial after evidence is recorded, rather than at the stage of deciding bail.
Decision
Taking an overall view of the material placed before it, the High Court held that the prosecution had presented sufficient prima facie material to justify the continued denial of bail. The Court found no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Special Judge and concluded that the grounds raised by the appellants did not warrant their release at this stage.
Accordingly, the criminal appeal was dismissed and the prayer for bail was rejected.
Case Details
Case Title: Dharmendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 5816 of 2026
Judge: Hon'ble Justice Jai Kumar Pillai
Decision Date: 27 July 2026
