Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Vinod Kumar Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 8058 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8058 MP
Judgement Date : 15 May, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod Kumar Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 May, 2023
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
                                      1
 IN       THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                             BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                          ON THE 15 th OF MAY, 2023
                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 21210 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
VINOD KUMAR YADAV S/O SHRI RAM LAL YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT GRAM
GANIYARI THANA SIMARIYA DISTRICT PANNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                   .....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MALLIKARJUN KHARE - ADVOCATE)

AND
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH STATION
INCHARGE THANA SIMARIYA DISTRICT PANNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AKHILENDRA SINGH - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

      This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                       ORDER

This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail relating to FIR/Crime No. 86/2023 dated 4.3.2023 registered at Police Station Simariya district Panna for the offence under Sections 294, 323, 327 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 86/2023 registered at Police Station-Simariya, District-Panna (MP) for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 327 and 506 of IPC.

3. The counsel contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case on account of faction rivalry. It is contended by the counsel that there was no alleged demand of money for liquor as put-forth by the complainant in the First Information Report and only with an oblique motive applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further contended by the counsel that the Court below has rejected the application while taking into consideration the past antecedents; whereas the Trial Court has failed to consider that as far as Crime No. 36/2015 is concerned, the applicant has already been acquitted and the judgment of acquittal has been brought on record as Annexure A-3. Counsel contends that the other case has been registered under Section 13 of the Public

Gambling Act, 1867; therefore, submits that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. Per contra counsel for the State submits that taking into consideration the past criminal antecedents and also the conduct of the applicant the Court below has rightly rejected the application filed by the applicant. It is contended that the applicant is guilty of manhandling of lady and, therefore, does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the rival submissions of counsel for parties. Perused the case diary. A perusal of case diary reveals that the applicant demanded money from the complainant to consume liquor and when the complainant did not succumb to the demand, the applicant assaulted her with a slap and also caused an injury by way of lathi. The medical report no where reflects that any grievous injury has been found on the person of the complainant. So far as Crime No. 36/2015 is concerned, the applicant has already been acquitted of the offence. Therefore, without commenting on merit this Court, deems it proper to allow the anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure filed on behalf of applicant.

6. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Vinod Kumar Yadav by the Police in the aforesaid crime, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer (Investigating Officer) for his regular appearance before the Police during the investigation or before the Court during the trial.

Certified Copy as per rules.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) V. JUDGE vivek

VIVEK KUMAR TRIPATHI 2023.05.16 12:46:36 +05'30'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter