[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Altaf Husain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 February, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4928
1 MCRC-3439-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 6 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3439 of 2026
ALTAF HUSAIN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Ms Ritu Sharma- Advocate and Satyendra Singh Kourav - Advocate
for applicant.
Shri Brijesh Kumar Tyagi - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is third bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail. His second bail application was dismissed vide
order dated 22.09.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 43276 of 2025 by this Court.
2. The applicant has been arrested on 25.01.2025 in connection with
Crime No. 22/2025 registered at Police Station Naisarai, District
Ashoknagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 109,
118(1), 118(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25-B of the
Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, complainant Javed Khan, while in an
injured condition at the Primary Health Centre, Naisaray, on 24.01.2025,
lodged a Dehati Nalishi No. 0/25 under Sections 115(2), 296, and 109 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stating that at about 5:30 PM today, he had
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4928
2 MCRC-3439-2026
come to the road in front of his uncle Tanveer Khan's hardware shop, at that
time, the accused Altaf arrived there and began abusing him with filthy
language regarding an old land purchase dispute. When the complainant
objected to the abuse, Altaf, with the intention to kill, struck him on the neck
with a sword, causing an injury on the left side of his neck from which blood
started oozing. Thereafter, Altaf again attacked him with the sword on the
little finger of his right hand, causing another bleeding injury. Upon hearing
his cries, Kamal Kevat and Sanjeev Rajak came to rescue him, whereupon
Altaf also assaulted Kamal with the sword and caused injuries to his body.
On the basis of the said Dehati Nalishi, a case was registered against the
accused Altaf under the aforesaid sections as Crime No. 22/2025 at Police
Station Naisarai, and a First Information Report was recorded. The injured
persons were medically examined and their MLCs and X-rays were
conducted. The accused was arrested on 25.01.2025, and Sections 118(1),
118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25-B of the Arms
Act were added.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The present bail
application is primarily preferred on the ground of grave prejudice caused to
the applicant due to inordinate and unexplained delay in the conclusion of
trial. It is submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since
25.01.2025, and despite the passage of a substantial period, the trial has
made negligible progress. The matter has repeatedly been fixed before the
learned Trial Court for recording the evidence of prosecution witnesses
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4928
3 MCRC-3439-2026
Aslam and Sanjeev Rajak on the last five dates; however, both the said
witnesses have deliberately failed to appear before the Court despite issuance
of summons and even bailable warrants. These circumstances clearly
demonstrate that the delay is entirely attributable to the prosecution and not
to the applicant. The trial is, therefore, not likely to conclude in the near
future, and continued incarceration of the applicant would amount to
punishment prior to conviction. It is further submitted that the applicant is a
permanent resident of District Ashoknagar, and there is no likelihood of the
applicant absconding or tampering with prosecution evidence or influencing
any witness. The applicant undertakes to abide by all the conditions that may
be imposed by this Hon'ble Court and to cooperate with the trial
proceedings. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is prayed
that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the applicant on bail in the
interest of justice.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for State and learned counsel for the
complainant have vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its
rejection.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Bail is a manifestation of the fundamental right to personal liberty
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and can be curtailed
only in accordance with the procedure established by law. The right to a
speedy trial is an integral and inseparable facet of the right to life and
personal liberty. In the present case, it is evident that the applicant has
remained in judicial custody for a considerable period. The record further
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4928
4 MCRC-3439-2026
reveals that the trial has not progressed substantially, and prosecution
witnesses have failed to appear despite repeated opportunities being granted
by the trial court. The delay in conclusion of the trial is not attributable to the
applicant. Prolonged incarceration of an undertrial, without meaningful
progress in trial, offends the mandate of Article 21 and weighs in favour of
granting bail to the applicant.
8. Considering the aforesaid and the fact that the material placed on
record does not disclose the possibility of the applicant's fleeing from justice,
this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
9. Accordingly, without commenting on merits of the case, this bail
application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand
Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the
concerned Court.
10. 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;
(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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:4928
5 MCRC-3439-2026
Officer, as the case may be;
(iv) The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency
of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically,
without further reference to the Bench;
(v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and
(vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
12. Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
