[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhagwat Dayal Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12315
1 MCRC-5947-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 12 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5947 of 2026
BHAGWAT DAYAL LODHI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Satyam Agrawal - Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Ravindra Shukla - Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Shri Lal Ji Kushwaha - Advocate through video conferencing and
Shri Ahmad Sajid Hussain - Advocate for the respondent/objector.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicants under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in connection
with Crime No.194/2025 registered at Police Station Budera, District Tikamgarh,
for the offence punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that since the applicants
are the family members of Hargovind, therefore, they have been falsely implicated
in the case. Hargovind has already been granted the benefit of regular bail. On a
complaint made by Hargovind, his wife and daughter-in-law, a cross-case has
been registered vide Crime No.209/2025 at Police Station Budera, District
Tikamgarh, against Pyarelal and Prabhan stating therein that those persons have
assaulted Hargovind and his wife. In the cross-case, it is clearly stated that the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12315
2 MCRC-5947-2026
incident has taken place on an agricultural field.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that in relation to
the said incident, vide Crime No.194/2025, an FIR has been registered by Pyarelal.
In the FIR, there is no allegation that at the relevant point of time, the applicants
were having any arm, ammunition or lathi/danda. It is stated in the FIR that
Hargovind assaulted Pyarelal with lathi and caused injury to him. The lathi had an
iron nail fixed to it. From the contents of FIR, it is clear that it is a case of free
fight. The applicants have been falsely implicated in the case, hence, they be given
the benefit of anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/objector has opposed the anticipatory
bail application and submitted that all the accused persons were present on spot
and, in furtherance of their common intention, Hargovind assaulted Pyarelal, as a
result of which, he sustained grievous injury and was admitted in the hospital. It is
submitted that in the alleged fight, Hargvoind suffered a fracture over his head.
Looking to the nature of crime, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the anticipatory
bail application and has submitted that as per the medical report, the victim was
admitted in the hospital and took treatment for a long period and the said fact is
corroborated by the contents of the FIR, hence, no case for grant of anticipatory
bail is made out.
6. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
7. From the contents of cross-case, it is clear that on 08.11.2025 at about
10.00 am, a quarrel started between the parties in relation to possession and
cultivation over an agricultural land. Both the parties belong to same ancestors. It
is also noteworthy that the injured sustained a head injury, which is alleged to have
been caused by Hargovind with a lathi. No other injury was found over the body of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:12315
3 MCRC-5947-2026
injured while he was produced for medical examination on 08.11.2025. The
applicants were neither named as victim nor injured. In the cross FIR, presence of
the applicants has not been mentioned, whereas the presence of Hargovind, his
wife, and daughter-in-law has been specifically stated.
8. Considering the aforesaid factual aspects of the case, this Court deems it
appropriate to grant the benefit anticipatory bail to the applicants. Thus, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
9. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be enlarged on
bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/trial Court for their appearance before the
concerned during the course of investigation or during trial Court, as the case may
be.
10. It is further directed that the applicants shall abide by all the conditions
as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
11. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
dm
