Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kuldeep @ Golu Bhadoriya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16088
1 MCRC-11576-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
ON THE 31st OF JULY, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11576 of 2025
KULDEEP @ GOLU BHADORIYA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Daya Ram Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner .
Ms. Ankita Mathur - Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
Advocate General.
ORDER
This is the Second application filed by the applicant u/S. 483 of
BNSS/439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to Crime No. 67/2024
registered at Police Station - Surpura, District - Bhind (M.P.) for the offence
under Section 296, 109(1), 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and section 25, 27 of
Arms Act. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 16/01/2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 55334/2024.
2. Prosecution story, in short, is that on account of some previous
dispute, applicant fired gun shot by means of Katta (country made pistol) on
the complainant, due to which, the complainant sustained injuries on his
right side of the chest. Accordingly, offence in question has been registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant / accused submits that applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 30.08.2024.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16088
2 MCRC-11576-2025
He further submits that charge sheet has since been filed and further
custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be required. He further
submits that material prosecution witnesses in the matter i.e. complainant, his
father, brother and uncle have since been examined before the trial Court.
Applicant is 21 years of age. He further submits that applicant is having no
criminal antecedents. He further submits that there is discrepancy of weapon
seized as per ballistic report. He further submits that bail may be granted to
the present applicant by imposing stringent condition. In support of his
contention, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the
judgment delivered by the Apex Court in the case of Bhausaheb Nagu
Dhavare vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. reported in 2001 (3) Crimes 410
(SC). It is further submitted that early conclusion of the trial is bleak
possibility and prolonged pre-trial detention is an anathema to the concept of
liberty. Applicant is permanent resident of District - Bhind (M.P.) and there
is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution
evidence, if released on bail. Hence, prayed for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the
bail application on the ground that all the prosecution witnesses who have
been examined before the trial Court have supported the story of the
prosecution and prayed for its rejection.
5. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and
the charge sheet has since been filed and all the material prosecution
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16088
3 MCRC-11576-2025
witnesses have been examined before the trial court and the applicant being
aged 21 years, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this
application is allowed, but with certain stringent condition in view of nature
of offence and it is directed that applicant be released on bail on furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) along
with two local solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial Court/Committal Court.
7. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the applicant:-
i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and
conditions of the bond executed by him/her;
ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation /trial, as
the case may be;
iii) The applicant will not indulge himself /herself 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 acts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the
case may be;
iv) The applicant will not commit any other offence in
future. In case offence of same nature is repeated, this bail order
shall automatically stand cancelled;
v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments
during the trial; and
vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16088
4 MCRC-11576-2025
permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may
be.
vii) The applicant shall appear and mark his attendance
before the SHO of the police station concerned once in First
Saturday of every month between 10 Am to 2 Pm till conclusion
of the trial, failing which, it would be open for the prosecution to
seek cancellation of the bail order.
8. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance by the office of this Court.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
Durgekar
