CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Akram vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 31 October 2025 · Citation: (2025) 10 MP CK 1372

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gajendra Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 14(A)(2) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 148, 149, 294, 307, 323, 326, 506 · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 480(3)
RESULT
Allowed/ Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 10456 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 400 words

Gajendra Singh, J

1.

The appellant has preferred this second criminal appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended by the Act of 2015) read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, being aggrieved by order dated 15.10.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Dewas in B.A. No.1256/2025. First application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 16.10.2024 being filed as MCRC in place of CRA.

2.

Appellant has been arrested on 06.01.2024 in connection with FIR/Crime No.976/2023 registered at Police Station Khategaon, Dewas (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 294, 307, 323, 326, 506, 148, 149 of IPC and under section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and 25 of the Arms Act.

4.

Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. It is further submitted that co-accused persons Dildar and Nazar have already been granted bail by this Court and the allegations against the appellant is to cause injury to Dinesh. The investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed in the matter, hence prays for release of the appellant on bail during trial.

5.

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the injured Dinesh has not made any severe allegations against the appellant, this Court is inclined to allow the appeal filed by the appellant. Consequently, by setting aside the impugned order of the Trial Court, the appeal is hereby allowed, without commenting anything on the merits of the matter. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his regular presence during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C./ 480(3) of BNSS. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

8.

With the aforesaid, this appeal is allowed and stands disposed of. All the other pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Certified copy, as per Rules.