High CourtsSingle Bench

Lalla Alias Devsingh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 22 January 2026 · Citation: (2026) 01 MP CK 1834

HON’BLE JUDGES
Milind Ramesh Phadke, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 115(2), 118(2), 296, 351(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 3431 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

17 paragraphs · 548 words

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

1.

This is second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the applicant for grant of bail. First application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the prayer after filing of the charge-sheet vide order dated 22.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.59460 of 2025.

The applicant has been arrested on 11.11.2025 in connection with Crime No. 149/2025 registered at Police Station Pichore District Gwalior, for offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 296, 351 (2) of BNS and further added Section 118 (2) of BNS.

As per the prosecution case, the dispute arose over grazing of cattle in which the allegation against the applicant is of causing injury by means of ballam over the hand of complainant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable time and that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. Learned counsel further submits that the role attributed to the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, namely Sobran Singh, who has already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.54092 of 2025 vide order dated 4.12.2025. On the ground of parity, the present applicant is also entitled to the benefit of bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not dispute the factum of parity as canvassed by learned counsel for the applicant.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations and particularly the ground of parity with co-accused, coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre- trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on 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 trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

1.

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2.

The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3.

The applicant will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4 . The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically, without further reference to the Bench;

5.

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

Certified copy as per rules.