Raghuveer Singh Alias Gabddu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Pushpendra Yadav, J

The appellant has filed this criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by order dated 30.12.2025 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Bhind whereby bail application under Section 483 of BNSS of appellant has been dismissed.

2 . Learned Counsel for the State submits that the victim has been informed about filing of this appeal in compliance with mandate of Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Appellant has been arrested on 29.12.2025 by the Police Station- Gormi District Bhind in connection with Crime No.294/2025, registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 351(3), 118(1) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(2) (va), 3(1) (Da) and 3(1) (Dha) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the crime. The allegations against the appellant involve hurling abuses and making caste-related remarks, during which he allegedly caused injury to the victim using a sharp-edged weapon. It is contended that the entire incident occurred due to previous enmity. The MLC conducted at Bhind made no mention of a finger amputation; however, a later report at Gwalior suggested an amputation or fracture of the little finger, which the Medical Board subsequently rejected. The appellant contends due to prior animosity, fasle case has been registered against him. As the investigation is now complete, the appellant seeks relief. Appellant is in jail and trial is likely to take long time to conclude. The appellant is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by the Court. On these grounds, he pray that the impugned order be set aside and appellant may be extended the benefit of bail.

5 . On the other hand, learned counsel for State as well as complainant opposed the appeal and prayed for its dismissal.

Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the case dairy.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that trial will take time, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it is directed that the appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.

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

The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

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

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

4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the are accused;

5.The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

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

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

C.C. as per rules.