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) 4029

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Manoj Shakya – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Daya Ram Sharma[P-1],Advocate General[R-1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA

th

ON THE 18 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 59490 of 2025 MANOJ SHAKYA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Vishal Sharma - Advocate for the applicant. Shri Satendra Singh Sikarwar - PP for the State.

ORDER

1. The present petition under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant/complainant for cancellation of bail granted to the respondents/accused vide order dated 02.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.

No.53631/2025

2. Counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been filed on the ground that the applicant obtained benefit of bail by this Court while presenting wrong fact and the charge-sheet was filed. But, the charge- sheet was not filed at that time. Therefore, the bail granted to the respondent No.2 vide order dated 02.12.2025 ought to be cancelled.

3. However, I am not convinced by the grounds raised in this applicant. The bail granted to the respondent cannot be cancelled merely because some fact was wrongly presented by the counsel of the accused. The bail is granted to the accused on the basis of overall facts and circumst

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top