High CourtsSingle Bench

Sunny Kewat vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 17 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 MP CK 1972

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Kumar Vani, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 14(A) · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 109(1), 118(1), 296, 351(2) · Arms Act, 1959-Section25 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294, 307, 323, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 10460 Of 2025
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

18 paragraphs · 679 words

Rajendra Kumar Vani, J

1.

This first criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by order dated 11.10.2025 passed in Bail application SC ATR No.157 of 2025 passed by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Bhopal (M.P.) whereby his bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, has been rejected.

2.

The appellant has been arrested on 23.8.2025 relating to FIR/Crime No.58 of 2025 registered at police station Talaiya, Bhopal, District Bhopal for offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 296, 118(1), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has pointed that the present appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the incident has taken place occurred on 09.02.2025 and on the same day the victim was taken to the hospital. The MLC report dated 09.02.2025 records that one known person, Annu, had caused injuries to him; however, in the FIR, no person was named and the report was lodged against unknown persons. It is further submitted that only on 15.02.2025, when the police recorded the statement of the victim, the name of the present appellant revealed for the first time. It is further submitted that the police has not made any efforts to arrest the appellant and that the appellant himself surrendered before the police on 23.08.2025 and has been in custody since then. It is also submitted that two other cases have been registered against the appellant; one under Section 307 IPC and other allied sections, which has already been decided by the Juvenile Justice Board and another under Sections 294, 323, and 506 IPC, which is still pending. In both cases, the appellant is stated to have been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the appellant is ready to abide by all the conditions as may be imposed by this Court. It is thus prayed that the appellant be released on bail.

4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application/appeal and prayed for its rejection.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Considering the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the present appellant on bail.

6.

Thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, the appeal is allowed and it is directed that appellant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Committal Court.

7.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant:-

i) The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

ii) The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

iii) The appellant will not indulge themselves 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;

iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

v) The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

vi) The appellant shall mark his presence before the concerned Police Station once in every fortnight till conclusion of the trial;

vii) The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be: and

viii) If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, then this order shall loose its effect automatically."

8.

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

Certified copy as per rules.