Sailu Alias Shelendra Gurjar 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 12.11.2025 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Daita 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 07.06.2025 by the Police Station-Unav, District Datia in connection with Crime No.106/2025, registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 125, 296, 115(2) and 298 of BNS, Sections 3(1)(da)(dha) and 3(2)(v,

a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and 25/27 of Arms Act.

It is the submission of counsel for the appellant that although, his earlier application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 18.09.2025 but thereafter, 5 months have lapsed and statement of complainant has already been examined which is material change in circumstances therefore, this appeal may be considered on merits.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. The only allegation against the appellant is that he fired a gunshot in the air which purportedly touched the victim's head, resulting in a minor abrasion. Looking to the fact that the incident occurred at 10:00 PM under the darkness and multiple persons firing simultaneously, the specific attribution of this injury to the appellant is highly improbable. The injured Deepak in his own statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. (now section 183 of the BNSS) has not specifically stated against the appellant and MLC confirms that the injuries sustained, were merely simple in nature. Furthermore, despite the rejection of prior appeal on 18.09.2025, a material change in circumstances has emerged that the complainant has been cross-examined and he has also not supported the story of prosecution and declared hostile. Appellant is in custody for more than 8 months. Trial is likely to take long time to conclude. The appellant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by the Court. Thus, on these grounds, he prays that the impugned order be set aside and appellant may be extended the benefit of bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection.

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

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that trial will take some time, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his 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 him;

2.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 he is 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.