IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY

th

ON THE 7 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 51190 of 2025

FARID Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearance:

Shri Kapil Pathak - Advocate for the applicant.

Smt. Nalini Gurung - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

ORDER

This is second bail application filed after filing of charge-sheet on

behalf of the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail. Earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer after filing of the charge-sheet

vide order dated 20.09.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.38994/2025.

2. The applicant is in custody since 05.08.2025 in connection with Crime No.104 of 2025 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District Khandwa for the offence punishable under Section 419, 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 469 and 471

of IPC.

3 . It is alleged that the applicant had made forged documents such as Adhar Card and other papers in the name of co-accused Ayush @ Vijay Baghel to facilitate co-accused persons for executing forged sale-deed with

respect to the property in question.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been implicated only on the basis of the memorandum of co-accused. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. There is no cogent evidence showing that the present applicant has caused forgery with respect to the any document in the name of any co-accused. Only memorandum being not admissible evidence, is not sufficient to even prima facie make applicant responsible. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that in two other cases the applicant has been made accused only on the basis of the memorandum. On above grounds, it is urged that applicant be released on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the application and submitted that applicant conspired with the other co-accused and he has provided documents personating the other co-accused person. She has also submitted that there are two another cases of similar nature have been registered against the applicant. Although the forged documents are being used in the commission of the offence by co-accused persons which is said to be prepared or provided by the present applicant but except the memorandum of the co-accused, no other evidence is available on record, so far as two other cases of similar nature are concerned they are also based only on the memorandum of co-accused. Thus, it is prayed that applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.

6. Considering the fact that except the memorandum of co-accused, no other evidence is available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.

7. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned for his appearance before it on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard.

8. On being released on bail, the applicant shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 480(3) of BNSS.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)

JUDGE R