Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 6936
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
GAJENDRA SINGH, J
DILIP PORWAL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8665 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Vivek Singh, Shri Govind Rai Purohit
For the Respondents: Rahul Solanki
The court permitted bail under specified conditions considering the completion of investigation and appellant's claims of false implication.
Headnote:This judgment concerns a repeat appeal under section 14A(2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989) against a trial court order rejecting a bail application. The appellant claimed innocence and that the investigation was complete with a charge sheet filed, while the State opposed on grounds of past criminal antecedents. The court, considering the circumstances, allowed the appeal and granted bail upon conditions. The appellant is directed to provide a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and comply with statutory conditions up to the trial's conclusion.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 16 OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8665 of 2025 DILIP PORWAL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:
Shri Vivek Singh -Senior Advocate with Shri Govind Rai Purohitfor the appellant.
Rahul Solanki appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].
ORDER This repeat Appeal (third) under section 14A(2) of the SC &
ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 is preferred against the order dated 18.08.2025 in SC ATR No.18/2025 by Special Judge (SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989, whereby the trial court has rejected the application filed under section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 by the appellant seeking bail in connection with crime no.623/2024 registered at police station Industrial Area, Jaora, district Ratlam for the offence punishable under sections 281, 125(2), 109, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and section 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989. The Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR earlier application was dismissed on 18.06.2025 in CRA No.5166/2025 on the ground that the appellant has criminal antecedents and the material witnesses have to be examined.
Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the offence. The investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. The conclusion of trial will likely to take long time, hence prayed for release of the appellant on bail.
Counsel for the State opposed the appeal.
Para-3(c) of the memo of appeal discloses that one case is pending and one case is resulted in imposition of fine of Rs.100/- u/s 13 of the M.P Gambling Act . The other cases have been resulted in acquittal. Crime No.23/2010 is disclosed as pending. The copy of that case has been provided and in which it it stated that same has been resulted in acquittal vide judgment dated 24.12.2011 as sessions case no.78/2010 by Special Judge (SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989, Ratlam and the victim also was examined on 23.06.2025 as PW/3, Aslam on 24.06.2025 as PW/4, Vinita on 30.07.2025 as PW/5 and Sher Ali on 07.08.2025 as PW/6.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, without commenting on the merit of the case, the appeal is allowed and the Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR appellant is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before that Court, as and when directed, during the pendency of trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 480 (3) of the BNSS, 2023 .
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
