[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajeet Kumar Shukla vs Sampat Kumar Shukla on 12 February, 2026
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12645
1 MCRC-6157-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 12th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6157 of 2026
AJEET KUMAR SHUKLA
Versus
SAMPAT KUMAR SHUKLA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Rohit Sharma - Advocate for
the petitioner.
Shri Vijay Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
Shri S.M.Patel - P.L. for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Case diary is available.
2. This first application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/438 of CrPC has been filed by applicant seeking
anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.35/2025, registered at Police
Station Chandiya, District Umariya for offences punishable under Sections
420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC.
3. It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that according to the
prosecution case, the applicant had taken the benefit of PMAY Scheme by
disclosing a different land, but the building was constructed over a different
land which was not owned by the applicant. It is submitted that without
entering into a controversy as to whether there was any agreement to sell
between the applicant and the original owner of the property over which the
building was constructed under the PMAY, it is submitted that subsequently,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12645
2 MCRC-6157-2026
the said land was purchased by the mother of the applicant. Even assuming
that earlier there was some irregularity, but with passage of time, it has been
regularized. It is further submitted that a civil dispute is going on between the
complainant and his family members and accordingly with oblique motive a
false complaint was filed.
4. Per Contra, the application is vehemently opposed by counsel for
the complainant. It is submitted that even if the land in dispute was
subsequently purchased by the mother of the applicant, it would not relieve
the applicant from his criminal activities. He further invited the attention
towards the affidavit to show that even the applicant while applying for the
benefit of PMAY did not disclose the Khasra no. in his affidavit and that
area was kept blank.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. So far as the fact that Khasra no. was not mentioned in the affidavit
filed in the proceedings for grant of benefit of PMAY is concerned, it is
suffice to mention here that it was for the sanctioning authority to take note
of that. If the sanctioning authority has ignored the said lapse then it cannot
be said that the applicant had any mensrea in not mentioning the khasra no.
in the affidavit. It is not out of place to mention here that the applicant had
also filed an application for quashment of the order passed by the Magistrate
under section 156(3) of CrPC, which has been rejected. The scope of
consideration of a petition under section 482 of CrPC for quashment of a
proceeding and the scope of bail application under section 482 of BNSS is
completely different. In the present case, even assuming that there was
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12645
3 MCRC-6157-2026
earlier some irregularity, but, admittedly the mother of the applicant has
purchased the land on which the building has been constructed. Under these
circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is
entitled for anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, it is directed that in case, if the applicant appears
before the Investigating Officer on or before 19.02.2026 and furnishes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, then
he shall be released on anticipatory bail.
8. The anticipatory bail shall continue till the conclusion of trial.
However, in case of bail jump, the trial court shall be free to issue arrest
warrant and shall be free to take the applicant in custody. It is made clear that
in case if applicant fails to appear before the Investigating Officer on or
before 19.02.2026 or fails to deposit the amount, then, this order shall
automatically stand cancelled.
9. With aforesaid observations, the application for grant of anticipatory
bail is allowed.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
HS
