Back
Cop Dragged on Bonnet During NSG Drill: MP HC Slams Brakes on Bail, Targets Contempt-Tainted Lawyer
In a stern ruling blending criminal accountability with courtroom discipline, the at Gwalior denied bail to Munendra Singh, one of three men accused of a brazen assault on a police constable during a mock drill. Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke not only rejected the plea citing the gravity of offences under the , but also issued a to the applicant's counsel, , for appearing despite a .
Night of Chaos at DB Mall: The Violent Traffic Stop
The incident unfolded in the early hours of , near DB Mall in Guna district, amid heightened security for an NSG mock drill. Constables Ravi Kumar Vimal and colleagues were managing traffic when a white Honda Amaze (MP 07-CJ-1124) sped rashly from Bus Stand Tiraha. Vimal signaled it to stop, but the driver allegedly accelerated, striking him before occupants—including driver Ankit Gurjar, Munendra Singh, and Shohil Khan—pulled the constable inside, flung him onto the bonnet, and dragged him 30-40 meters. Vimal fell headfirst, suffering head and leg injuries with bleeding.
Police intercepted the car via wireless alert, arrested all three, and registered FIR No. 21/2026 at Padav police station under (assault on public servant), (hurting public servant), (vehicular hurt), (rash driving), and (kidnapping-like cruelty). Investigation included site maps, witness statements, and vehicle seizure; Munendra filed his first bail plea under after arrest on February 5.
Passenger or Accomplice? Defense Pushes Innocence, Prosecution Cries Concerted Attack
Munendra's counsel argued his client was merely a passenger, with rash driving pinned solely on the driver. No specific overt act tied him to obstructing duty or injuring the cop, claims were "general and ." In custody 20+ days with investigation "substantially complete"—vehicle seized, witnesses recorded, no custodial need—he cited Satender Kumar Antil v. (2022) 10 SCC 51, urging bail to avoid punitive pre-trial detention, promising compliance with conditions.
The public prosecutor countered fiercely: this wasn't mere rashness but a "deliberate and " to evade checks during sensitive ops. Occupants collectively hit, pulled, and dragged Vimal, endangering life and flouting public order. Role dissection awaits trial; release risks witness influence amid ongoing probe. Gravity—assault on duty cop—demanded rejection.
' ' Trumps Bail Guidelines: Why Satender Doesn't Fit
Justice Phadke found evidence of a " " by occupants to obstruct the constable, deeming allegations too serious for bail. Prolonged detention wasn't "punitive" given offence nature and investigation stage. Satender Kumar Antil was distinguished: it curbs mechanical arrests in lesser cases, not grave assaults on officials during security drills.
"The manner in which the incident is alleged to have occurredindicated aon the part of the occupants of the vehicle to obstruct and deterred a public servant from performing his official duty."
The court weighed public administration impact, rejecting minimal-role claims at this juncture.
From Bail Bench to Bar Brawl: Lawyer's Conduct Sparks Contempt Firestorm
The plot thickened with Bhadauria's courtroom antics. Previously convicted of criminal contempt in Contempt Petition (Criminal) No. 15/2018 (order , affirmed by reducing fine from ₹5 lakh to ₹1 lakh), he hadn't purged it per Rule 16, (Conditions of Practice) Rules, 2012—barring appearances until done.
Yet, he argued aggressively, diverting to settled matters, making "insinuatory and provocative remarks," and showing "defiance of judicial discipline." The bench invoked precedents like Bar Association v. UOI (1998) 4 SCC 409 (courts regulate advocate appearances), v. (2004) 6 SCC 311, Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of UP (2016) 8 SCC 335, and R. Muthukrishnan v. (2019) 16 SCC 407 (inherent debarment powers).
"The tone, tenor, and manner of submissions reflected a deliberate attempt to intimidate and influence the Court... His submissions exhibited a lack of restraint, decorum, and adherence to the ethical standards expected of an officer of the Court."
Final Gavel: Bail Rejected, Notices Issued
Bail dismissed outright. Office directed to issue show-cause to Bhadauria within 7 days (returnable 4 weeks), questioning his authority to appear, and notice to on post-contempt steps. Matter relisted week of .
This dual ruling underscores zero tolerance for violence against on-duty police and lax advocate ethics, potentially chilling similar defences while reinforcing high courts' disciplinary muscle. As other reports note, it spotlights how personal legal baggage can't shadow client advocacy unchecked.
Key Observations:
"Continued detention of the applicant would therefore serve no useful purpose."(Defense echo, ultimately rejected)"At this stage, the statements recorded during investigation... do not persuade this Court to hold that the applicant’s role is so minimal."(On bail denial)"Mere modification of the fine by the Hon’bledoes not amount to exoneration nor does it constituteunder the law."(On contempt)"Advocacy carries with it... a concomitant duty to uphold the dignity, authority, and decorum of the judicial process."
