ORDER

1. This is an application under section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)/482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for exercising extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court and sought quashing of the order dated 17.1.2025 whereby the Court below has rejected the bail granted to the applicant in Crime No.206/2023 vide order dated 3.10.2023. The Court has exercised the power provided under section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that an offence was registered against the present applicant vide Crime No.206/2023 under sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323 and 324 of the IPC. Later on an additional offence under section 326 of IPC was also added and applicant was arrested on 29.9.2023 and was sent to jail.

3. An application for grant of bail was moved under section 439 of Cr.P.C. and vide order dated 3.10.2023, the bail application was allowed and bail was granted to the present applicant, though, with certain conditions contained in the order itself. While considering the bail application, the Court has also taken note of the six offences registered against the present applicant as has been informed to the Court. It is stated in the application that the present applicant was an elected Sarpanch and was eyesore for several persons and because of political rivalry, he was targeted and was also victimized by lodging FIR by respondent No.2 for offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 427, 294 and 506 of IPC vide Crime No.178/2024 at Police Station Garh, District Rewa on 02.05.2024. As per the applicant, this FIR was lodged with a sole intention for getting the bail of the present applicant cancelled by the Court in Crime No.206/2023. As per the applicant, in Crime No.206/2023, respondent No.2 was not the complainant and therefore, he cannot move an application for cancellation of bail granted in Crime No.206/2023.

4. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that due to personal grudge with him, the SHO namely Mr. Vikas Kapees of Police Station Garh, lodged another FIR in Crime No.239/2024 for the offence under section 307 of IPC as a complainant. As per the applicant, the prosecution story in Crime No.239/2024 is completely false and concocted because no such incident had occurred and applicant being a member of scheduled caste community became an eyesore for some of the political persons and therefore, it was planned and a false case was got registered against the present applicant. He has tried to establish before this Court highlighting the facts in registration of Crime No.239/2024 that the said case is false and therefore, he submits that the same cannot be made basis for cancelling the bail granted to the present applicant.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that it can also be ascertained from the fact that seven cases were registered against the present applicant and out of those seven, investigation is completed only in Crime No.239/2024 and in remaining six cases, investigation is still incomplete and chargesheet is yet to be filed. However, in Crime No.239/2024, final report has been filed very hastily. He has also pointed out that a letter was issued by the said SHO asking the competent authority to remove the Sarpanch from the post whereas the said SHO had no concern and had nothing to do with the said aspect. This indicates personal interest of the SHO in the matter and thereby registered of a false FIR against the applicant. Thus, according to him, the Court has not considered the existing circumstances and rejected the bail granted to the present applicant in a very mechanical manner and therefore, the order impugned, according to him can be set aside. He has relied upon an orders passed by the High Court in M.Cr.C. No.1281 of 2025 (Mahesh Saket v. The State of Madhya Pradesh) and M.Cr.C. No.28999 of 2024 (State of Madhya Pradesh v. Anil Saket).

6. Shri Khare, learned counsel for the objector has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel f