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

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 684

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Gourav – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 54231/2025



Advocates:
Sachin Parmar,Advocate General[R-1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR

th

ON THE 12 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 54231 of 2025

GOURAV

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearance:

Shri Sachin Parmar - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Bhaskar Agrawal Govt. Adv appearing on behalf of Advocate

General[r-1].

ORDER has been no mistake on his part due to which the trial court should not have framed charges against him. It is further submitted that the main accused persons, who are involved in the offence of theft, have already been granted bail by this Court and the trial court also; whereas it is alleged against the present applicant that he had purchased the stolen jewellery and sold it to some third party and no recovery has been made at his instance. Thus, it is submitted that the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

1] They are heard and perused the case diary/challan papers.

2] This is the second bail application filed by the applicant under

Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as he / she is implicated in connection with Crime No.622/2022, registered at Police Station-Barwah, District-Khargone (Mandleshwar) (MP) for offence punishable under Section 411 of the IPC. The applicant is in custody since 04.07.2025. Applicant's first bail application-M.Cr.C.No.45712/2025 was dismissed by this Court on 04.11.2025, with liberty to renew the prayer after

the charges are framed.

3] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that since some other

accused persons are still absconding the charges have not still been framed despite the fact that the applicant is lodged in jail since 04.072025 and there

5] Counsel for the respondent / State, on the other hand has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that as many as 33 cases of almost same nature have also been registered against the applicant. Thus, it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out.

6] Having considered the rival submissions, perusal of the case diary,and taking note of the fact that the applicant was not responsible for non-framing of charges and no recovery has been made from him, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application.

7] Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 480(3) BNSS, 2023.

8] However, looking to the criminal antecedents of the applicant, he is directed to mark his presence before the concerned police station on every Sunday between 12:00 noon to 04:00 pm til the trial is concluded.

9] With the aforesaid, the M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)

JUDGE moni

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