High CourtsSingle Bench

Shishupal Singh Tomar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 21 January 2026 · Citation: (2026) 01 MP CK 1819

HON’BLE JUDGES
Milind Ramesh Phadke, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 294, 323, 364A, 365, 379, 452 · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 3095 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

13 paragraphs · 470 words

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail relating to Crime No. 312 of 2023 registered at Police Station Gole Ka Mandir, District Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 452, 365, 147, 148, 149, 379, 364-A of the IPC and Sections 11, 13 of the M.P. Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the case of the present applicant is akin to the case of other co-accused, namely, Narendra Singh Kushwah who has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.42245 of 2025, therefore, claiming parity, it is prayed that the present application be allowed and benefit of bail be also granted to the applicant.

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

The case of the applicant appears to be similar to the case of co-accused, namely, Narendra Singh Kushwah who has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.42245 of 2025. Thus, there is no reason to take a different view than the one taken in the case of above said co-accused.

In view of above and looking to the fact that the material placed on record does not disclose the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, this Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail upon 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 Arresting Officer, 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;

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

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

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

Certified copy as per rules.