[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijay Singh Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 February, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5568
1 MCRC-6674-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 12th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6674 of 2026
VIJAY SINGH GURJAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prashant Sharma- Advocate and Shri Divakar Vyas - Advocate
for applicant.
Shri Mohit Shivhare - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Shri Rohit Tiwari - Advocate for respondent [COMP].
ORDER
The present first application under Section 482 of BNSS has been filed
by the applicant seeking grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime
No.19/2026 registered at Police Station Maharajpura, District Gwalior (M.P.)
for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2),
319(2), 61(2) of BNS.
2. The allegation against the present applicant is that he, in collusion
with other co-accused persons, prepared forged Aadhaar cards in the names
of the complainants and, on the basis thereof, fabricated a false power of
attorney; thereafter, by impersonating the complainants through another
person, they fraudulently sold the agricultural land owned and possessed by
the complainants for a consideration of Rs.48,00,000/- thereby committing
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5568
2 MCRC-6674-2026
cheating against the complainants.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted
that the applicant's alleged involvement is limited solely to signing as a
witness to a Power of Attorney. The applicant was requested by the Power of
Attorney holder to sign the document before the office of the Registrar. The
applicant was neither aware of the contents nor of the nature of the said
document, as the same was not produced or explained to him. He signed the
document under the bona fide impression that he was merely identifying the
executant (Power of Attorney holder) before the Registrar. It is further
submitted that the applicant is not a beneficiary of the said document and has
derived no benefit whatsoever from the alleged transaction. Except for
signing as a witness at the Registrar's office, the applicant has played no role
in the execution or preparation of the document. His implication appears to
be misconceived and without any substantive material. It is further submitted
that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the
prosecution evidence. The applicant is a law-abiding citizen and undertakes
to fully cooperate with the investigation and to remain present as and when
required by the Investigating Agency. The applicant is also ready and willing
to abide by any terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble
Court. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and has prayed for its rejection. It is
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5568
3 MCRC-6674-2026
submitted that the applicant has criminal antecedents involving three cases;
out of these, he has been acquitted in two cases, while one case is still
pending adjudication.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the
present anticipatory bail application and prayed for its rejection.
6. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
limited role assigned to the present applicant, without commenting on the
merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out
a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the
applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) along with one solvent
surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority or
Investigating Officer.
9. 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:5568
4 MCRC-6674-2026
Officer, as the case may be;
(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence during the period of
bail;
(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.
10. Application stands allowed and disposed of.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station
concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
