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) 36527

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR


NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:40549


MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 20592 of 2026


JOHN @ CHIRAG MISHRA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH


Appearance:

Shri Aryan Shukla - Advocate for the applicant (through VC)

Shri S.M. Patel - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Shri Ashok Kumar Tiwari - Advocate for the objector.


BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI


ON THE 1st OF JUNE, 2026

ORDER

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail relating to Crime No.126/2026 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 119(2), 351(2), 85 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the present applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is innocent and is ready to abide by the conditions as imposed by the Court. As per the allegation, the present applicant has demanded Rs. 5 lakh and in compliance of the said demand, he has caused injuries to the victim. The incidence is related to 02.03.2026, but the FIR has been lodged after three days on 05.03.2026. No explanation for such delay has been offered by the prosecution. It is also submitted that the case of the prosecution is not based on cogent material and evidence. It is submitted that there is no allegation of extortion against the applicant. The injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature. Therefore, the present applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

3. Per contra, counsel for the victim as well as counsel for the State have vehemently opposed the application on the ground that there is allegation against the present applicant of causing injuries to victim in order to raise the demand of Rs. 5 lakh and also that the applicant has tried to have unnatural sex with the victim/complainant. The complainant has sustained various injuries that have been revealed from the medical report. The offence under Section 119(2) of BNS is punishable with imprisonment of life. It is also submitted that the case of the prosecution is based on cogent evidence and material and there is no ground for release of the applicant on anticipatory bail.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary, FIR, medical report, and other material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the allegations against the present applicant are serious in nature.

5. The prosecution case discloses that the applicant allegedly caused injuries to the complainant in furtherance of a demand of Rs. 5 lakh and also attempted to commit unnatural sexual acts with the victim. At this stage, considering the gravity and nature of the accusations, the severity of punishment and the material collected during investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail is hereby dismissed.

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