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) 2530

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rahul – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 5694/2026



Advocates:
Omprakash Solanki,Advocate General[R-1]

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3638

1 MCRC-5694-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 4 OF FEBRUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5694 of 2026

RAHUL

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Appearance:

Shri Omprakash Solanki - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Surendra Gupta - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

ORDER

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.306/2024 registered at Police Station Kanad,

District Agar Malwa(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections, 309(4),

310(2), 238, 61(2)(a), 312, 111 of BNS, 2023, Section 25(1a) and 27 of Arms

Act and Section 3/181 and 5/180 of Motor Vehicle Act. Applicant is in

custody since 05.01.2025. Complainant - Bharat Yadav (PW-1) and the

injured eye-witness Shankar Singh (PW-2) have been examined before the

trial Court.

Heard the arguments.

Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary

and the relevant material on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN

Signing time: 04-02-2026

19:14:59

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3638

2 MCRC-5694-2026

in the application, submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the

alleged offence on the basis of information of co-accused in police

custody. There is no likelihood of tampering with remaining evidence by the

applicant, as material prosecution witnesses i.e. the complainant - Bharat

Yadav (PW-1) and injured eye-witness Shankar Singh (PW-2) have been

examined. They did not support the prosecution case. Jail incarceration is

causing hardship to the young applicant and his dependent family. Applicant

is ready to cooperate in trial.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the

ground of gravity of alleged offence. Learned counsel refers to 02 criminal

antecedents, as mentioned in the case diary. Applicant is aged 23 years. He

is a Driver by profession.

In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the other matters

are pending for trial. Applicant has never been convicted for any offence.

According to the accusation on record, Bharat Yadav and Shankar Singh

were travelling in Tata Magic vehicle of Vidhya Enterprises towards Village

Palda on Agar-Sarangpur Road in the night of 18.12.2024. Four unknown

offenders intercepted their vehicle. They snatched bag of Bharat Singh

containing Rs. 25,000/- in cash. Bharat Yadav and Shankar Singh lodged FIR

at P.S. Kanad for offence punishable u/s 309(4) of BNS, 2023. During

investigation, applicant was arrested on 05.01.2025. Applicant - Rahul was

identified by Bharat Yadav and Shankar Singh in TIP. Cash Rs. 3,000/- was

recovered from the applicant - Rahul . Material prosecution witnesses have

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN

Signing time: 04-02-2026

19:14:59

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3638

3 MCRC-5694-2026

been examined and they did not support the prosecution case. Co-accused

Sandeep and Vinod have been extended benefit of bail vide orders dated

08.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 59059/2025 & M.Cr.C. No. 59448/2025.

The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot

be dismissed as manifestly baseless.

As informed, applicant has the 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 offence, considering the socio-economic status of the applicant, there

appears to be no likelihood of recidivism or tampering with evidence or

influencing the remaining witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be no

compelling reason to continue incarceration of the young applicant. However,

the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.

Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstan

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