High CourtsSingle Bench

Shubham vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 25 March 2026 · Citation: (2026) 03 MP CK 0882

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subodh Abhyankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 318(4), 316(5) · Protection Of Interests Of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2018 — Section 6(1) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3)
RESULT
Allowed/ Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 14252 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

12 paragraphs · 512 words

Subodh Abhyankar, J

1.

They are heard. Perused the challan papers/documents.

2] This is the applicant's first bail application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S./ 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as he/ she is implicated in connection with Crime No.21/2026 registered at Police Station Industrial Area, District Dewas for offence punishable under Section 318(4), 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 6(1) of the Protection of Depositors Interest Act. The applicant is in custody since 17.3.2026.

3] Allegation against the applicant is of his involvement in the present case of fraud to the tune of Rupees One Lakh, as the main allegation is against co-accused Priya.

4] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that, so far as the present applicant is concerned he has already settled the matter out of Court with the complainant, who has also no objection if the application is allowed. It is also submitted that against the applicant there are four criminal antecedents, out of which in one case he has already been acquitted. It is further submitted that the applicant is lodged in jail since 17.3.2026, and the final conclusion of trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Thus, the application may be allowed.

5] Counsel for the objector has no objection if the present bail application is allowed.

6] Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that there are as many as four criminal antecedents against the present applicant.Thus, no case for grant of bail is made out.

7] Having considered the rival submissions, on perusal of the case diary and considering the fact that the applicant is lodged in jail since 17.3.2026 and the final conclusion of trial is likely to take sufficient long time and the complainant has no objection if the application is allowed, this Court is inclined to allow the present application.

8] Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. It is directed that if the applicant is found to be involved in violation of any of the terms of this order, an application for cancellation of his bail may be filed before the trial Court itself, which shall decide the same in accordance with law.

9] However, looking to the criminal antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is also directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station on every Sunday in the concerned police station on every Sunday between 12:00 noon to 04:00 p.m.

10] M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.