Madhya Pradesh High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 25 - May 31, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 174 to 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 187

Nominal Index:

• Central MP Gramin Bank v Babita Mor 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 174
• X v State of Madhya Pradesh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 175
• Santosh Agrawal v MP Madhya Kshetra Vidhut Vitran 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 176
• Anuj Kumar Sharma v State of Madhya Pradesh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 177
• Laxmikant Sonu v Smt Radha 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 178
• Smt Jyoti Shrivastav v State of Madhya Pradesh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 179
• Sumer Singh v Renu Garg 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 180
• State v Giribala Singh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 181
• Kangaroo Kids International Pre School v State of Madhya Pradesh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 182
• Vinay Pratap Singh v Pushpendra Singh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 183
• Shiv Kumar Vaishya v Shubhkaran Vaishya 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 184
• Ashok Singh v State of Madhya Pradesh 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 185
• Prem Singh v State of MP 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 186
• Madhu v Hemendra Kumar 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 187

Gratuity Can't Be Automatically Forfeited On Employee's Dismissal Unless Conditions Under Payment Of Gratuity Act Are Met: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that mere dismissal from service itself cannot result in automatic forfeiture of gratuity until statutory conditions under the Act are satisfied.

The court further dismissed an appeal filed by Central MP Gramin Bank challenging the Single Judge's order directing payment of gratuity to the widow of a deceased employee who was terminated on allegations of misappropriation.

Case Title: Central MP Gramin Bank v Babita Mor, Writ Appeal 3160-2025

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 174

Interfaith Couples Must Show Clear Proof Of Threat To Seek Continuous Police Protection, General Apprehensions Not Enough: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed an inter-faith couple's petition seeking round-the-clock (24-hour) police protection including specialized security during night hours, observing that every plea for continuous police protection must demonstrate clear proof of threat rather than general apprehensions or isolated incidents.

Case Title: X v State of Madhya Pradesh, W.P. No. 14252/2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 175

Lawyer Running Office From Residence Can't Be Charged Electricity At Commercial Rates: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that an advocate operating his office from his residential premises cannot be subjected to a commercial electricity tariff, observing that the legal profession does not amount to a 'commercial activity'.

Case Title: Santosh Agrawal v MP Madhya Kshetra Vidhut Vitran, WP-1507-2021

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 176

Freezing Entire Salary Account Over Suspicious Transactions Violates Right To Livelihood: MP High Court Grants Relief To Armed Force Personnel

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a serving Special Armed Force Personnel cannot be denied access to his legitimate salary merely because certain transactions in his bank account are under inquiry.

Therefore, the bench directed the Bank to permit operation of the petitioner's salary account, except to the extent of the suspicious/disputed transactions, which may continue to remain under restraint subject to further orders by the investigating agency.

Case Title: Anuj Kumar Sharma v State of Madhya Pradesh, WP-9453-2021

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 177

S.125 CrPC | Husband's Detention For Failure To Pay Maintenance Can't Become Indefinite Punitive Imprisonment: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that imprisonment in maintenance execution proceedings is merely a coercive mechanism intended to secure compliance and cannot be converted into indefinite punitive detention.

Case Title: Laxmikant Sonu v Smt Radha, MCRC-18044-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 178

Excluding Divorced Daughter From Family Pension Violates Article 14: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a divorced daughter cannot be excluded from the definition of family under the MP Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976 and therefore denying family pension benefits to them would amount to discrimination and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Case Title: Smt Jyoti Shrivastav v State of Madhya Pradesh, WP-1666-2022

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 179

MP High Court Revives Sheopur Municipal President Election Petition, Slams State For Taking Contradictory Stand On Gazette Notification

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has restored an election petition challenging the election of the President of the Sheopur Municipal Council and strongly criticised the State Government and the elected President for taking contradictory legal stands and delaying the proceedings.

Case Title: Sumer Singh v Renu Garg, C.R.No. 175/2024

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 180

Twisha Sharma Dowry Death Case | MP High Court Quashes Anticipatory Bail Granted To Mother-In-Law Giribala Singh

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Wednesday (May 27), quashed the anticipatory bail granted to retired judge Giribala Singh by the Trial Court in her daughter-in-law Twisha Sharma's alleged dowry death case.

Case Title: State v Giribala Singh, MCRC 24475 of 2026, Navnidhi Sharma v State of MP, MCRC 24405 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 181

MP High Court Declines To Quash FIR Against Preschool Director Booked For Violating Order To Disclose Book Prices, Sellers On Website

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against the Director of Kangaroo Kids International Preschool, accused of disobeying a Collector's orders to disclose details of preschool books, their prices and particulars of sellers to ensure transparency and curb the arbitrary sale of educational material.

Case Title: Kangaroo Kids International Pre School v State of Madhya Pradesh, WP-13805-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 182

S.223 BNSS | Opportunity Of Hearing To Accused Does Not Mean They Must Be Given Entire Evidence Prior To Cognizance: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that while proviso to S.223 BNSS prescribes procedure followed by Magistrate before taking cognizance mandating accused be given an opportunity of hearing, however such an opportunity does not automatically translate into an obligation to furnish the entire evidence to the accused at threshold.

Case Title: Vinay Pratap Singh v Pushpendra Singh, MCRC-17776-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 183

Revenue Authorities Can't Decide Title Disputes In Partition Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that revenue authorities exercising powers under Section 178 of the MP Land Revenue Code cannot adjudicate disputed questions of title, and any person claiming to be a Bhumiswami without being recorded as such in revenue records must seek a declaration from a competent civil court.

Case Title: Shiv Kumar Vaishya v Shubhkaran Vaishya, WP-504-2013

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 184

Govt Employees Can't Be Victimised Through Transfer Or Attachment Orders: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside the transfer order of a Gram Rojgarsahayak, observing that a government employee cannot be victimised through attachments or punitive transfers, and if the government wants to transfer the employee on administrative grounds, the best option is through a transfer policy.

Case Title: Ashok Singh v State of Madhya Pradesh, WP-18968-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 185

MP High Court Flags 'Lack Of Coordination' Between Police, Prosecution; Says If IO Can't Be Served Summons, Status Of Other Witnesses Imaginable

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has flagged a 'total lack of coordination' between the police department and the prosecution after observing that, in a murder case the testimony of a Sub-Inspector could not be recorded because of failure to serve summons to him.

Case Title: Prem Singh v State of MP, CRA-3722-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 186

Father Can't Discriminate Between Educational Expenses Of Son And Daughter: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, while allowing a minor daughter's plea for enhancement of maintenance, observed that the father could not be permitted to discriminate between the educational expenses of the son and the daughter.

Case Title: Madhu v Hemendra Kumar, CRR-4655-2025

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 187