Sunil Kushwah vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

The applicant has filed this First bail application under Section 482 of BNSS/438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.179 of 2025 registered at Police Station Girwai, District Gwalior (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 125, 296, 115 (2), 351 (2), 190, 191 (2), 191 (3) of BNS and section 30 of Arms Act. Allegation against

Allegation against the present applicant is that he along-with other co-accused persons have committed marpeet with the complainant party by means of fire-arm.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is no previous enmity between the applicant and the complainant.

Though the active participation of the applicant in the crime is alleged as applicant, but injuries received by the injured are not attributed to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is permanent resident of District Gwalior and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in investigation/trial and would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment in any manner to the complainant party side. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the co-accused person namely Kaushalendra Singh Kushwah and Bhupendra Alias Lala Yadav have already been granted bail in M.Cr.C. Nos.49444 of 2025 and 50362 of 2025 vide order dated 4.9.2025 and 10.11.2025 and the case of the present applicant is akin to that of co-accused persons, thus, he is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity also. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made out.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State has vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that applicant is having criminal history of one case and prayed for dismissal of the application.

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

Considering the above submissions and facts situation of the case as well as material placed on record, this Court finds that a named FIR has been lodged against the applicant, whereas the co-accused who have already been granted anticipatory bail were not named at the time of registration of the FIR. Further, the applicant had been absconding since the date of the incident, which led the Trial Court to issue a proclamation against him under Section 84 of the BNSS. In view of these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the conduct of the applicant is not comparable to those of the co-accused who have been granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, and considering the seriousness of the offence along with the overall facts and circumstances, the application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the BNSS is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.