High CourtsSingle Bench

Chandsingh Parihar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 22 December 2025 · Citation: (2025) 12 MP CK 1869

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 480(3), 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 309(6) · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 59339 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

10 paragraphs · 401 words

Anil Verma, J

1.

This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail.

2.

The applicant has been arrested on 04.11.2025 in connection with Crime No.252/2025 registered at Police Station - Amola, District Shivpuri for offence under Section 309(6) of BNS, under Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act and under Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.

3.

Prosecution story, in short, is that a minor altercation took place between the complainant and accused persons, which resulted in the registration of present FIR.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. He is in custody since 04.11.2025. Investigation is almost over. Co-accused Ajad Pal and Shivaji have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 17.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.57524/2025 and 58270/2025 in the similar circumstances. FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. Applicant is not having any criminal past. Applicant is permanent resident of District Jhansi (U.P.). There is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. Final conclusion of trial will take a long time. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.

5 . Per contra, learned counsel for respondent/State opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection by submitting that katta has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant but fairly admits that there is no criminal antecedents has been found against the present applicant.

6.

Both the parties are heard and perused the Case Diary.

7.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, and also taking note of the facts that other co-accused persons namely Ajad Pal and Shivaji have been enlarged on bail, charge sheet has been filed and final conclusion of trial will take long time, therefore, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.

8.

Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C./480(3) of BNSS.

9.

Certified copy as per rules.