High CourtsSingle Bench

Arpit Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 23 February 2026 · Citation: (2026) 02 MP CK 1816

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pramod Kumar Agrawal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 480(3), 482, 482(2) · Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 6470 Of 2026
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

14 paragraphs · 454 words

Pramod Kumar Agrawal, J

1.

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. for grant of anticipatory bail who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.16/2026 registered at Police Station - Tejgarh, District- Damoh (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act.

2.

As per the prosecution story, on 18 January 2026, the police received secret information that a car carrying illegal liquor would pass near Sajwali Lake. Acting swiftly, they set up a checking point in the area. Soon, a grey car approached and appeared suspicious. When the police signaled it to stop, the driver attempted to escape. After a brief chase, the vehicle was intercepted in a nearby forest area. Two men, Satyam and Shera Singh Lodhi, were found inside the car. During the search, the police recovered 63 litres of country-made liquor worth approximately Rs.33,000/-. The men were unable to produce any valid license or documents for transporting the liquor. On the basis of which the offence has been registered against the present applicant under the aforesaid section.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that nothing is to be recovered from present applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused. Except memorandum, there is no evidence available against the applicant. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for State has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and prayed for it's rejection.

5.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is allowed. It is directed that if the applicant is arrested by the police, then he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.

6.

Applicant shall abide by the following conditions under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.:-

(a) Applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

(b) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to complainant or witnesses;

(c) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

(d) He shall not commit similar offence, of which, he is accused or suspected.

(e) He will further abide by the conditions enumerated in Sub-section

(3) of Section 480 of the B.N.S.S.

Certified copy as per rules.