[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anil Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4124
1 MCRC-4936-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 9 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4936 of 2026
ANIL PARIHAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Amit Raval - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Ayushyaman Choudhary - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This first application has been filed by applicant under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in
connection with Crime No. 01/2026 registered at Police Station- Nagjhiri,
District- Ujjain (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3)
and 351(3) of the BNSS, 2023. Applicant is apprehending arrest in the matter.
Learned Counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds mentioned
in the application, submits that it is purely a civil transaction regarding agreement
to sale of a land. Learned counsel referring to the documents submitted with the
application contends that Mohd Salim executed an agreement to sell in favour of
applicant Anil Parihar on 22.05.2019. Applicant issued notice for specific
performance of contract to Mohd Salim on 03.01.2025 and filed a civil suit on
11.02.2025. Mohd Salim appeared through his counsel on 09.04.2025. Despite
filing of the civil suit, Mohd Salim transferred land to Prakash Yadav on
29.10.2025. Prakash Yadav was impleaded as a party on 11.12.2025. The trial
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4124
2 MCRC-4936-2026
Court stayed further sale of the disputed property vide order dated 22.12.2025.
Thereafter, false FIR was registered against the applicant on 01.01.2026 by the
wife of seller Mohd Salim. Learned counsel submits that applicant has paid a
consideration money through RTGS and NEFT to Mohd Salim. Mohd Salim has
endorsed receipt of the consideration amount on back of the agreement to sell.
Later, he resiled from the agreement and alleged fraud and forgery in execution of
the agreement to sell, after filing of the civil suit by the applicant and transferring
disputed property to Prakash Yadav. The FIR was lodged through the wife. The
alleged offence is not committed by the applicant. The prosecution is based on
documentary evidence. Learned counsel further submits that applicant enjoys
good character and social standing. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is
not needed in the matter. Jail incarceration on false accusation would cause
hardship to the applicant and family. He is ready to cooperate in investigation.
Therefore, applicant may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail.
Per contra , learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application on
the ground of gravity of alleged offence. Learned counsel refers to 02 criminal
antecedents against the applicant, as mentioned in the case diary. Applicant is
aged around 48 years and is a business man by profession.
In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was
acquitted vide orders dated 15.03.2023 & 11.12.2025 passed in RCT No.
5809118/2014 & 8705/2015 in relation to the Crime No(s). 127/2014
& 554/2017. No prosecution is pending against the applicant.
As per the accusation on case diary, Sehraj Bi W/o Mohd Salim
submitted a written complaint to the SHO, P.S. Nagjhiri on 01.01.2026 that her
husband, Mohd Salim was in need of money. Anil (applicant) advanced loan to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4124
3 MCRC-4936-2026
Mohd Salim on an interest @2% per month. Her husband is regularly paying the
loan amount. Anil misrepresented to her husband Mohd Salim that they need to
execute a document to avoid income tax. Therefore, a document was executed.
The original copy was kept by Anil. Later, it was revealed that Anil had executed
an agreement to sell by committing fraud with Mohd Salim. Further, endorsement
with regard to extension of the period for execution of sale deed was forged by
Anil. On such allegations, the P.S. Nagjhiri registered FIR at Crime No. 1/2026
for offence punishable u/S 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023.
Applicant is apprehending arrest in the matter.
The material on record clearly shows that a civil litigation with regard to
specific performance of contract is underway. Mohd Salim appeared in the civil
case on 09.04.2021. Thereafter, he transferred the disputed property to Prakash
Yadav vide sale deed dated 29.02.2025. After passing of the stay order dated
22.12.2025 by the trial Court, present FIR was lodged by Sehraj Bi, wife of Mohd
Salim on 01.01.2026. The case diary further reveals that the witness of agreement
to sell namely, Rakesh and Pradeep Thakur did not support the accusation in their
statements recorded u/S 180 of BNSS, 2023. The dispute prima-facie appears to
be of civil nature. The veracity of the prosecution and complicity of the applicant
in alleged offence will be considered on merits after evidence.
As informed, applicant has the responsibility of dependent family.
Considering the age, profession and status of the applicant, there appears to be no
likelihood of fleeing from justice or involving in any criminal activity. In absence
of criminal antecedents, considering the socio-economic status of the applicant,
there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with the evidence, influencing the
witness or interfering in the investigation by the applicant. The incarceration of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4124
4 MCRC-4936-2026
applicant does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of investigation. The
grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant will not cause prejudice to free, fair and
full investigation. Considering his clean past, age, status and profession, the
applicant may suffer hardship and prejudice due to incarceration entailing social
disrepute and humiliation. Considering the overall circumstances of the case, but
without commenting on merits of the accusation, this Court is inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant. Thus, the application is allowed
Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant - Anil
Parihar shall be released on bail in connection with Crime as mentioned in the
first paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the officer making arrest/the Competent Court for
compliance with the following conditions: (For the convenience of understanding
by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are reproduced in Hindi as under):-
1) Applicant shall make himself available for investigation as may be directed
by the Investigation Officer.
(1) vUos"k.kdrkZ iqfyl vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kkuqlkj vUos"k.k gsrq vkosnd miyC/k jgsxkA
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence.
(2) vkosnd dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxk ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha gksxkA
(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) vkosnd izdj.k ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh O;fDr dks izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls izyksHku] /kedh
;k opu ugha nsxk] ftlls ,slk O;fDr ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky; ;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh dks izdV djus
ls fuokfjr gksA
(4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the evidence
or allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) vkosnd izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls lk{; ds lkFk NsMNkM djus dk ;k lk{kh ;k lkf{k;ksa dks
cgykus&Qqlykus] ncko Mkyus ;k /kedkus dk iz;kl ugha djsxkA
(5) During trial, the applicant shall ensure due compliance of provisions of
Section 309 of Cr.P.C/346 of the BNSS. regarding examination of witnesses in
attendance;
(5) fopkj.k ds nkSjku] mifLFkr xokgksa ls ijh{k.k ds laca/k esa vkosnd /kkjk 309 na-iz-la-@346
Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa dk mfpr vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djsxkA
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4124
5 MCRC-4936-2026
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.
The Investigation Officer /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/she had explained the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
sh
