Ashish @ Manav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Pramod Kumar Agrawal, J

This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. The applicant is in custody since 10.10.2025 in connection with Crime No.389/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, Betul (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.

As per the prosecution story, cheating and forgery is alleged against the present applicant. On the basis of which, offence has been registered against the present applicants under the aforesaid sections.

Learned counsel for applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has made accused on the basis of memorandum of co-accused-Ashwin. It is further submitted that co-accused Ashish has been enlarged on bail by the trial Court vide order dated 17/10/2025. It is further submitted that document has already came into the knowledge of the police, therefore, that document does not corelate the present applicant to the alleged offence. There is no previous criminal record of applicant. Trial of the case will take considerable time. Counsel for the applicant is ready to deposit the amount. In support of his contention, counsel for the applicant placed reliance in the case of Subhelal @ Sushil Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh passed in Cr.A. No.818/2025 and Umesh @ Boni Vs. State of M.P. in M.Cr.C. No.38756/2021. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant No.1 be released on bail pending the trial.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the bail application on the ground that the case of present applicant is defer with the case of co-accused. Present applicant has a selection list and that list has been given by him to Ashwin and Ashwin has given the list to the complainant and in that place, the name of the complainant's wife is mentioned. It is further submitted that the mobile has been seized from the possession of present applicant, in which copy of various orders regarding appointment letters which was issued by the Government department has been recovered, which shows that present applicant was preparing various forged appointment letter in the name of Government department. Charge sheet has also not been filed yet. It is further submitted that rulings which have been cited by the learned counsel for the applicant is not applicable in the present case. Hence, the applicant does not deserve grant of anticipatory bail.

Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the allegations levelled against the present applicant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Therefore, application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant, stands dismissed.