[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akash Tomar Alias Aryan Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11048
1 MCRC-14671-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 2 nd OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14671 of 2026
AKASH TOMAR ALIAS ARYAN TOMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Imran Khan - Advocate for the applicant.
Smt. Kalpana Parmar - PP for the State.
ORDER
This is the first bail application 483 of BNSS filed by the applicant for
grant of bail. He has been arrested on 24.11.2025 by Police Station Sihoniya,
District Morena in connection with Crime No.110 of 2025 registered in
relation to the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2),
351(3), 3(5), 117(2), 61(1)(2), 103 of BNS.
2 . As per prosecution story, on 10.11.2025, the complainant Arjun
Singh appeared at the Police Station along with his cousin Jai Tomar and
lodged a report stating that on the same day, he and his cousin Jai Tomar
were returning from Morena to their village Mohanpura on a motorcycle.
When they reached a little ahead of the canal culvert on Gopi Road,
Khadiyahar, at about 6:00 PM, the accused persons, namely, Ganesh Tomar,
Pappu Tomar, Saurabh Tomar, and Kanha Tomar, all residents of village
Gopi, stopped their motorcycle. Due to previous enmity, the accused persons
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11048
2 MCRC-14671-2026
started abusing them in filthy language. Thereafter, the complainant and Jai
Tomar got down from the motorcycle and asked the accused not to use
abusive language. At this, accused Ganesh Tomar assaulted the complainant
with a stick, causing injuries to his mouth. When his cousin Jai tried to
intervene and save him, the other accused persons, namely, Saurabh, Kanha,
and Pappu assaulted Jai with sticks, kicks, and fists, resulting in blunt
injuries to both his hands, both legs, and his waist. Meanwhile, two to three
unknown persons also arrived from the roadside and joined the accused in
assaulting the complainant and Jai with kicks and fists. Their names are not
known to the complainant. At that time, the complainant's uncle Bhagwan
Singh Tomar and cousin Vishal Tomar reached the spot, witnessed the
incident, and intervened to rescue them. While leaving the place, the accused
persons threatened to kill them. On the basis of this report, Crime No.
110/2025 was registered against the accused persons under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 294(A), 351(3), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
3 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous
enmity between the parties. It is further submitted that the name of the
applicant does not find place in the First Information Report and his
implication is vague and omnibus in nature, as the allegations are primarily
directed against the named accused persons, while the role attributed to the
unknown persons is general and unspecific. It is further submitted that no
specific overt act has been assigned to the present applicant and his alleged
involvement has been subsequently introduced during the course of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11048
3 MCRC-14671-2026
investigation without any reliable or cogent material. It is further submitted
that the name of the applicant does not find mention even in the statements
of the complainant side recorded under Section 161 of the Code, which
further strengthens the contention that he has been falsely implicated. It is
further submitted that the present applicant has been roped in at the instance
of co-accused Saurabh and Ganesh, who, due to prior enmity, in connivance
with the police of Police Station Sihoniya, have falsely implicated the
applicant by way of a premeditated and conspiratorial act. It is further
submitted that about one year prior to the present incident, a criminal case
regarding assault had already been registered against Saurabh and Ganesh at
the instance of the applicant, and due to such previous hostility, they have,
out of vengeance, got the name of the applicant falsely incorporated in the
present case with the aid of the police. It is pointed out that there is
inconsistency between the version as narrated in the First Information Report
and the statements of the injured witnesses with regard to the number of
unknown persons alleged to have participated in the incident. Such
contradictions go to the root of the prosecution case and create serious doubt
about the manner of occurrence as well as the alleged involvement of the
present applicant. It is also submitted that the injuries alleged to have been
sustained by the complainant and the injured persons are simple in nature
and there is no medical evidence indicating any grievous or life-threatening
injury. The essential ingredients of the serious offences invoked are not made
out against the present applicant from the available material. It is further
submitted that the investigation is complete or substantially progressed and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11048
4 MCRC-14671-2026
no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is also contended
that the applicant has been in custody since 24.11.2025 and the trial is likely
to take considerable time to conclude. It is further submitted that trial will
take time for its conclusion and the applicant is permanent resident of
District Morena and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering
with the prosecution evidence. He is ready to abide by the terms and
conditions as may be imposed. It is further submitted that co-accused Kishnu
@ Kishunatha Parmar has already been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 20.03.2026 passed in MCRC No.8705/2026.
Under these grounds and on the ground of parity, counsel for the applicant
prays for grant of bail.
4 . Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State vehemently
opposed the application and prayed for its rejection looking to the nature and
gravity of offence.
5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled
with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and
prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, and
looking to the parity, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the
applicant. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,
this application is allowed. It is hereby directed that the applicant shall be
released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of trial Court.
6 . This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11048
5 MCRC-14671-2026
following conditions by the applicant:-
i. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by him;
ii. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
Officer, as the case may be;
iv. The applicant shall not involve in any criminal activities in future
and shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is
accused;
v. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial;
vi. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. Application stands allowed and disposed of.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
Rashid
