[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:12301
1 MCRC-15598-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 16th OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 15598 of 2026
MANOJ SAHU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Ms. Ayushi Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harish Sharma Dy. GA for the respondent/State.
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun, learned counsel for the respondent
[COMP].
ORDER
This is the fourth bail application 483 of BNSS filed by the applicant
for grant of bail. He has been arrested on 19.08.2025 by Police Station
Bhander, District Datia in connection with Crime No.186 of 2025 registered
in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) of the BNS,
2023 and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier, his first and third
applications were dismissed on merits vide orders dated 4.11.2025 and
9.3.2026 in M.Cr.C.Nos. 48781 of 2025 and 9841 of 2026 respectively.
As per prosecution story, on 03.08.2025, the complainant Baccha
Yadav lodged a Dehati Nalishi report at Community Health Center, Bhander,
alleging that on the same day at about 1:00 PM, he had gone to the cowshed
to serve the cows and was sitting under a tin shed. At that time, present
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:12301
2 MCRC-15598-2026
applicant/Manoj Sahu, armed with a country-made pistol, Chitru, armed with
a stick, and Jitu armed with an axe came there due to an old enmity. Manoj
Sahu (present applicant), with intention to kill, fired a shot from his pistol,
which hit the complainant on the back, above the hip, causing him to fall on
the ground. After the assault, the accused persons fled from the spot. The
incident was witnessed by Buddh Yadav and Prahlad Yadav, and it was
Prahlad who informed the police by dialing 100, after which the complainant
was taken to Bhander Hospital for treatment. On the basis of such allegation,
alleged crime was registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the case. He is in custody since 19.08.2025. It is further
submitted that the true factual background of the case reveals a long-standing
enmity between the complainant party and the applicant's family, as earlier,
on 15.11.2020, the complainant Baccha Yadav and his associates had set fire
to the applicant's Bolero pickup vehicle, in respect of which the applicant
had lodged a report at Police Station Bhander and consequently, Crime
No.299/2020 under Section 435 IPC was registered against Baccha Yadav
and Jasrath Yadav. Thereafter, on account of the same enmity, the
applicant's father Kalyan Singh alias Kallu was murdered by Baccha Yadav,
Heti Yadav, Jasrath Yadav, and Prahlad Yadav on 01.08.2021, in connection
with which Crime No.212/2021 under Sections 302, 307, 506-B, 34 IPC and
Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act was registered against them. Now, the
injured has been discharged from hospital and he is well. The investigation
is complete and the charge sheet has already been filed. It is further
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:12301
3 MCRC-15598-2026
submitted that trial will take time for its conclusion and the applicant is
permanent resident of District Datia 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. With the aforesaid
submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made out.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as counsel
for the complainant had opposed the bail application and had submitted that
the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, involving the use
of a firearm with intention to kill the complainant. It is contended that the
complainant sustained a gunshot injury, and the applicant is specifically
named in the FIR as the person who fired the shot. The offence is grave and
heinous, and releasing the applicant on bail at this stage may adversely affect
the investigation and create a possibility of influencing witnesses. Therefore,
considering the seriousness of the offence, the nature of the weapon used,
and the prima facie evidence available, the applicant does not deserve
the benefit of bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
appended with the application.
After considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties, and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the
allegations against the applicant are specific and serious in nature as the
applicant is alleged to have fired a gunshot with intention to kill the
complainant, which caused an injury on his back above the hip. The nature
of the offence, the weapon used, and the circumstances under which the act
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:12301
4 MCRC-15598-2026
was committed indicate a deliberate and premeditated assault arising out of
previous enmity between the parties. Even otherwise, there is no change in
circumstances as of now. Therefore, no case is made out for grant of this
fourth bail at this stage.
Considering the totality of the circumstances, the seriousness of the
allegations, and the role attributed to the applicant, this Court does not find it
a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of the applicant is
hereby dismissed.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
Rks
