SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9543

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Jain @ Ramdev Kanjar – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 57308/2025



Advocates:
Makhan Singh Sondhiya[P-1],Advocate General[R-1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 15 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 57308 of 2025 JAIN @ RAMDEV KANJAR Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Makhan Singh Sondhiya - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Apoorv Joshi GA for the State.

ORDER

1. This first application has been filed by applicant under Section

483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 80/2024 registered at Police Station- Malawar, District- Rajgarh(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC. He is in judicial custody since 08/11/2025.

2. Heard the arguments.

3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and the relevant material on record.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence merely on basis of information given by co-accused in police custody. He has not committed the alleged offence No incriminating material, much less, the articles of theft, to connect the applicant with the alleged offence, has been seized at the instance of applicant. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant and the dependent family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in trial.

5 . Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. Learned counsel refers seven criminal antecedents against the applicant as mentioned in the case diary.

6. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that all the other matters are pending for trial. He has never been convicted.

7. According to the material available on case diary, a theft was committed at the residence of Bhawaribai. The gold and silver jewellery, LED TV and cash amount of Rs. 30,000/- were stolen. The Police Station - Malawar registered FIR for offence punishable under section 457 and 380 of the IPC against unknown offenders. Co-accused Anita @ Amitabh was apprehended. He informed that the applicant was his associate in the alleged theft. Accordingly, applicant was arrested on 08/11/2025. He is in custody ever since. However, no article of theft was recovered at the instance of applicant. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. The trial is under way. The veracity of prosecution and complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence will be determined after evidence in the trial.

8. As informed, the applicant is aged 25 years and is labourer by profession and has the family responsibility. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. Considering the socio- economic status of the applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. The offence is triable by JMFC. There appears to be no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However, the observations, herein-

above, are recorded for present application only.

9. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the merits, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is allowed, however, on stringent conditions in view of his criminal antecedents.

10. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant-Jain @ Ramdev Kanjar shall be released on bail in connection with Crime, as mentioned in first paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the following conditions : (For convenience of understanding by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are al

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top