High CourtsSingle Bench

Nitin Kushwah vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 15 January 2026 · Citation: (2026) 01 MP CK 1759

HON’BLE JUDGES
Milind Ramesh Phadke, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 109(6), 115(2), 296, 304(2), 324(4) · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1960 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

18 paragraphs · 479 words

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

1.

This is first application filed by applicant under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail.

2.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.207/2025 registered at Police Station Girwai District Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 304(2), 324(4) and 109(6) of BNS and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the case of the present applicant is akin to the case of co-accused, namely, Monu Kushwah, who has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.60706/2025, therefore, claiming parity, it is prayed that the present application be allowed and benefit of bail be also granted to the applicant.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not dispute the factum of parity with the said co-accused.

5.

Heard counsel for parties and perused the case diary.

6.

The case of the applicant appears to be similar to the case of co-accused, namely, Monu Kushwah, who has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.60706/2025. Thus, there is no reason to take a different view than the one taken in the case of above said co- accused.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances brought on record and to maintain parity, this Court is inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this application is allowed.

8.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged 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 Arresting Officer for his appearance before it during the course of investigation or before the trial Court concerned during trial, as the case may be.

9.

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

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

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

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

iv) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

v) The applicant shall not commit any other offence during the period of bail;

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

10.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station concerned for compliance.

11.

Certified copy as per rules.