Rahul Rajput vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

This is second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the applicant for grant of bail. His earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew his prayer after recording of Court statement of complainant/injured vide order dated 11.11.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.51597 of 2025 by this Court.

The applicant has been arrested on 23.09.2025 in connection with Crime No.247/2025 registered at Police Station Purani Chhawni District Gwalior for offences under Sections 109(1), 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS enhanced Section 117 (2) of BNS.

As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant, while driving his four-wheeler, struck the complainant Akhilesh and his nephew Saurabh with the vehicle and thereafter, along with co-accused persons, assaulted them with sticks, thereby causing injuries.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence whatsoever. It is further submitted that the prosecution case suffers from serious infirmities and apparent fabrication of evidence. As per the record, a pen-drive was allegedly prepared on 21.08.2025 and seized on the same date, whereas the DVR, being the original source from which the pen-drive is stated to have been prepared, was seized subsequently on 22.10.2025. This fact has also emerged in the testimony of the concerned witness. Moreover, the panchnama of the video footage is dated 19.08.2025. Under these circumstances, it is manifest that the chronology of seizure and preparation is inherently contradictory and renders the prosecution version highly doubtful, clearly indicating fabrication. Additionally, the video footage panchnama itself has already been objected to, as it neither depicts the alleged incident nor contains any identification of the applicant. Even otherwise, the second injured witness, namely Saurabh, has stated that the vehicle hit them thrice, which is not corroborated by the alleged video footage. A perusal of the challan papers further reflects serious inconsistencies with regard to the seizure of the DVR, preparation and seizure of the pen-drive, and preparation of the panchnamas, which cumulatively demonstrate manipulation and concoction of evidence. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 23.09.2025. The trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Gwalior and there is no likelihood of his absconding, tampering with prosecution evidence, or influencing any witness. The applicant undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the applicant on bail in the interest of justice.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application, submitting that the injuries sustained by the victims are serious in nature and duly supported by medical evidence. In view of the gravity of offence and the manner of commission, learned counsel for the State prays for dismissal of present bail application.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties 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:-

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

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

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 him/her 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;

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

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

Certified copy as per ruels.