[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Munir Khan @ Sonu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:9137
1 MCRC-12560-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 7 th OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12560 of 2026
MUNIR KHAN @ SONU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Surendra Tuteja advocate for the applicant.
Shri Rahul Solanki public prosecutor for State.
ORDER
1. This first application has been filed by applicant under Section 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with
Crime No. 354 of 2025 registered at Police Station-Ringnod, District - Ratlam
(MP) for offence punishable under Sections 140(3), 117(3), 308(5), 115(2),
127(3), 140(2), 351(3) of BNS and Section 25 of Arms Act. Applicant is in
judicial custody since 20.01.2026.
2. Heard the arguments.
3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and
the relevant material on record.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the
application, submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged
offence merely on the basis of information of co-accused in police custody, which
is not admissible in evidence. No incriminating material is seized at the instance
of the applicant. The injured complainant did not allege complicity of the
applicant in abduction and assault. It is alleged that the applicant had provided Car
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:9137
2 MCRC-12560-2026
bearing registration No. MP-09-CB-7300, but the Car does not belong to the
applicant. The registered owner of the car Manoj Sharma was not interrogated by
the Police. Therefore, complicity of applicant in the alleged offence is not made
out. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. Applicant
has clean past with family roots. There is no history of evading process of law.
There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. Jail
incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant and the dependent family.
Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.The alleged offence is not heinous or
brutal in nature affecting society at large.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the ground
of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going through the case diary, learned
counsel fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant.
He is aged 30 years and is labourer by profession.
6. According to accusation on case diary, Narendra @ Sardar, Yuvraj @ Timma,
Abhishek and Rahul forcefully abducted Baluram on 11.09.2025. They took
Baluram to various places, assaulted him and demanded ransom from his family
for release. Nirmalabai, wife of Baluram reported the incident to the Police Station
Ringnod. Tracing the Aadhar Card and driving license recovered from the spot of
incident, Narendra @ Sardar was apprehended. Narendra informed that Sonu had
conspired with him and Rahul for abduction of Baluram. Accordingly, he, Rahul,
Shahrukh, and Yuvraj abducted Baluram and kept him at various places and
demanded ransom from his family. A Maruti Suzuki Car used for abduction was
provided by Sonu. The Maruti Car and other incriminating material were seized at
the instance of Narendra, Yuvraj and Abhishek. The statement of victim Baluram
was recorded. The applicant Sonu @ Munik Khan was arrested on 20.1.2026. He
is in custody ever since. The supplementary final report was submitted against the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:9137
3 MCRC-12560-2026
applicant. The fact remains that the applicant did not physically participate in
abduction. He is implicated on the basis of information given by co-accused in
police custody. No incriminating material is seized at the instance the applicant.
The call detail report showing complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence is
not available. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit
and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of the prosecution
and complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence will be determined after
evidence in the trial.
7. As informed, the applicant has responsibility of aged parents. Considering
these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence
of any criminal antecedent, considering the socio-economic status of the applicant,
there appears to be no likelihood of recidivism or tampering with evidence or
influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be no compelling
reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However, the observations,
herein-above, are recorded for present application only.
8. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the case, in
the light of aforesaid facts, but without commenting on the merits, this Court is
inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, present application is allowed.
9. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant-Munir Khan @ Sonu shall be
released on bail in connection with Crime, as mentioned in first paragraph of this
order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court, for compliance with the following conditions : (For convenience of
understanding by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are also reproduced in
Hindi as under):-
(1) Applicant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the concerned
court;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:9137
4 MCRC-12560-2026
(1) आवेदक संबंिधत यायालय के िनदशानुसार सुनवाई क येक ितिथ पर उप थत रहे गा ।
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) आवेदक समान कृ ित का केाई अपराध नह ं करे गा या उसम स मिलत नह ं होगा ।
(3) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them/him/her from disclosing such facts to
the Court or to the police officer;
(3) आवेदक करण के त य से प रिचत कसी य को य या अ य प से लोभन, धमक या
वचन नह ं दे गा, जससे ऐसा य ऐसे त य को यायालय या पुिलस अिधकार को कट करने से
िनवा रत हो ।
(4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the evidence or allure,
pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) आवदे क य या अ य प से सा य के साथ छे डछाड करने का या सा ी या सा य को
बहलाने -फुसलाने, दबाव डालने या धमकाने का यास नह ं करे गा ।
(5) During trial, the applicant shall ensure due compliance of provisions of Section 309 of
Cr.P.C./346 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding examination of witnesses in
attendance;
(5) वचारण के दौरान, उप थत गवाह से पर ण के संबंध म आवेदक धारा ३०९ दं. .सं. / ३४६ भारतीय
नाग रक सुर ा सं हता, 2023 के ावधान का उिचत अनुपालन सुिन त करे गा ।
1 0. This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of
breach of any of the preconditions of bail, the trial Court may consider, on merit,
cancellation of bail without any impediment from this order.
11. The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the personal
bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of them is
unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he had explained the conditions to the
concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
BDJ
