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

th

ON THE 11 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56023 of 2025 RAHUL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Ms. Mansi Kushwah, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Romil Verma, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/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.726 of 2025 registered at Police Station-Station Road, Ratlam, District Ratlam (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P.

Excise Act. Applicant is in judicial custody since 22.11.2025.

2. Heard the arguments.

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

3. 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 information of co-accused in police custody. He has not committed the alleged offence. No incriminating material, much less, the illicit liquor was recovered from active and conscious possession of the applicant. The investigation is almost complete. Further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not needed in the matter. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant his family members. Co-accused Ajay, Sourabh and Harshit have been extended benefit of bail vide order dated 18.09.2025, passed in M.Cr.C. No.42396/2025. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. Learned counsel for the State further refers to three criminal antecedents against the applicant registered vide Crime No.488/24 for offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(2), 3(5) of BNS; Crime No.357/2025 for offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act and 25/27 of the Arms Act and Crime No.585/2025 for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, as mentioned in the case diary.

5. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that in Crime No.488/2024, the matter has been disposed off on the basis of compromise. In other two matters, the applicant has been granted bail. He has never been convicted for any major offence.

6. According to the material available on case diary, on 04.09.2025 the police force of PS-Station Road, reached DMart Bypass Rehmat Nagar Corner to verify the secret information. A Car was intercepted. Ajay was found driving the car. Sourabh and Harshit were travelling in the car. During search, country- made plain liquor, total quantity 72 bulk liters was recovered from the dicky of a car bearing registration no.GJ-06-LB-9248. Ajay, Sourabh and Harshit informed that Rahul(applicant) and Aman were following them in another car. The police party tried to intercept the other car, but they fled away. On such information, applicant Rahul was formally arrested on production warrant on 22.11.2025. A Maruti car was recovered at his instance. The investigation is underway. The veracity of prosecution and complicity of the applicant will be determined after evidence in the trial.

7. As informed, the applicant - Rahul is aged around 26 years. He is a labourer and has responsibility of dependent family. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence of any substantial criminal past and previous conviction for any major offence, 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 onl