IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY

nd

ON THE 22 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2502 of 2026 PINTURAM AND OTHERS Versus THE SATAE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Ms. Namrata K. Agrawal - Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Devendra Shukla- Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

ORDER This is the first application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the applicants for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.231/2025 registered at Police Station-Saleha District Panna for the offences punishable under Sections 318, 111(4) [wrongly mentioned as 114(4) in impugned order], 319(2) of BNS. The applicants are in custody since 22.12.2025.

2. As per the prosecution story, on 10.7.2025 one Kailash, who later on identified as Jagdish has proposed to sell a gold-chain to complainant Anil Gupta for which the complainant has paid him Rs.three lakhs in advance, but thereafter Kailash did not turn up. On the basis of written application submitted by complainant Anil Gupta, Crime No.231/2025 was registered at Police Station Saleha. Further, during the course of investigation, on 22.12.2025 nine persons were arrested in suspected circumstances on the basis of information received by the police personnel including present applicants.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and they have no nexus with the complainant Anil Gupta. It is further submitted that the police has arrested the applicants without any basis and they have been identified on the spot and the identification memo was prepared by the police. The applicants have no criminal past. The charge sheet has already been filed. Thus, it is prayed that applicants may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that Rs.20,000/- cash and a silver coin was recovered from the possession of applicant Parasram and Rs.12,000/- cash and a silver coin was recovered from the possession of applicant Pinturam. It is further submitted that the applicants belong to Rajasthan. Thus, he prays for rejection of this bail application. However, learned counsel for the State on query, unable to demonstrate the connection of present applicants with the complainant Anil Gupta.

5. Considering overall facts and circumstances of the case, and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.

6. It is directed that the present applicants namely Pinturam and Parsaram shall be enlarged on bail their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with separate surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned for their appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of the trial. It is further directed that the applicants shall comply with the provisions of Section 480 (3) of BNSS.

7. Accordingly, this M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

(RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)

JUDGE Ansari