[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay Bajaj (Agrawal) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:63842
1 MCRC-49620-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 8 th OF DECEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 49620 of 2025
AJAY BAJAJ (AGRAWAL)
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Abhinav Shrivastava - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Rohit Sharma - Advocate for the Objector.
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
B.N.S.S. for grant of anticipatory bail, who is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Crime No. 150/2023 registered at Police Station - Hatta,
District Damoh (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 392,
506 (2) of IPC.
2. As per the prosecution story, the allegation against the applicant is
that he snatched the bag of complainant in which Rs. 12,00,000/- was kept
therefore, the aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and
co-accused.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that in this
case there was dispute between both the parties regarding transaction of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:63842
2 MCRC-49620-2025
money. Applicant is money lender and he is having license of money
lending. Complainant had taken the money from the present applicant and
applicant has also filed a complaint u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in
which judgement was passed by the trial court and against that judgment
present applicant has filed a petition for leave to appeal and liberty was
granted vide order dated 10.11.2025 passed in Cr.A. No. 5484/2022 and as
per the judgment of Apex Court in Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran
Etc., 2025 SCC Online SC 1320, the matter is filed before the Court of
Sessions and the same is pending. It is submitted that in this case statements
of complainant Prakash Chandra Agrawal and his son Prakhar Agrawal u/s
164 of Cr.P.C. have been recorded in which they have stated that they have
received the money from applicant. After investigation, closure report was
filed by the police. It is submitted that when statement of Prakash Chandr
aAgrawal was recorded in reference of closure statement he has taken the
different stand then what he has deposed u/s 164 of Cr.P.C.
4. It is submitted that earlier Prakash Chandra Agrawal has also filed
an affidavit in support of his statement u/s 164 of Cr.P.C. but on the basis of
his statement given in a closure case, learned Magistrate Court has taken the
cognizance and learned court has dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
It is submitted that even if the warrant has been issued by the Court then also
anticipatory bail may be granted in the suitable case. It is further contended
that conduct of the complainant is not good and even on the earlier occasion
also he has taken such type of modus operandi and thereafter he and other
party reached on the settlement. It is submitted that one FIR u/s 316, 318 of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:63842
3 MCRC-49620-2025
BNSS has also been registered against the complainant. Applicant has no
criminal antecedents and nothing is recovered from him. There is no need of
custodial interrogation of the applicant. Therefore, it has been prayed that the
applicant may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the Objector has opposed the anticipatory bail
application and submitted that complainant Prakash Chandra Agrawal in his
statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. dated 4.11.2024 has not deposed
against the applicant because he was under the pressure of applicant and
police has not done proper investigation and filed the closure report. During
the closure proceeding, the complainant Prakash Chandra Agrawal has given
statement against the applicant and Court has not accepted the closure report
and taken the cognizance. Learned counsel for State has also opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that in the CCTV footage
it is seen that complainant was drawing the money and that money has been
taken by the present applicant. Therefore, prayed for rejection of the bail
application.
6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without
commenting on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail application filed by
the applicant is allowed. It is directed that if the applicant is arrested by the
police, then he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating
Officer/Arresting Authority.
6. Applicant shall abide by the following conditions under Section
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:63842
4 MCRC-49620-2025
482(2) of B.N.S.S.:-
(a) Applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a
Police Officer as and when required;
(b) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or
promise to complainant or witnesses;
(c) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the
Court;
(d) He shall not commit similar offence, of which, he is accused or
suspected.
(e) He will further abide by the conditions enumerated in Sub-section
(3) of Section 480 of the B.N.S.S.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
navin
