[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pratik Agrawal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4646
1 MCRC-5666-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 13th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5666 of 2026
PRATIK AGRAWAL
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Manu Maheshwari - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Sunit Kapoor - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Ronak Badawaya - Advocate for the respondent [OBJ].
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. 390/2025 registered at Police Station- Agar
District- Agar Malwa (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 316(5),
338, 336(3) and 61(2) 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 applicant has been falsely implicated in this
matter. It is a case of business transaction between farmers, commission
agent Ashwin and the transporter Pawan Jain. Pawan Jain purchased
Soyabean from farmers for transportation. He received the amount after
delivery of Soyabean from the applicant but did not pay the amount to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4646
2 MCRC-5666-2026
farmers, therefore, the commission agent Ashwin Jain lodged the FIR against
Pawan Jain. During investigation, the applicant is implicated merely on the
basis of statement of co-accused Pawan Jain that the applicant facilitated
some bilti and e-way bill for transportation of Soyabean to Soyug Plant in
Kota Bundi Rajasthan. Pawan Jain has accepted that he has received the
amount of Soyabean produce from the applicant, therefore, no wrongful gain
was earned by the applicant. The relevant documents have been seized,
therefore, no further recovery of documents is needed in the matter. Learned
Counsel referred to various documents submitted with application to show
regular business transactions with Suyog Plant regarding sale of Soyabean
produce. The applicant is aged around 38 years and is businessman by
profession. 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. Co-accused Divyang Shah has been
extended benefit of anticipatory bail vide order dated 10.02.2026 passed in
M.Cr.C. No. 4835/2026. He is ready to cooperate in the investigation.
Therefore, on the ground of parity, applicant may be extended the benefit of
anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for the State, ably assisted by counsel for
the objector opposes the bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged
offence. Learned counsel submits that the trucks were loaded at Agar for
transportation of Soyabean produce but the applicant forwarded a forged bilti
regarding loading of trucks at Dahod Gujarat to facilitate transportation of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4646
3 MCRC-5666-2026
the Soyabean produce. The relevant documents have been seized but
custodial interrogation of the applicant would be required in the matter to
verify the process of sale of Soyabean produce and money transaction
between applicant and main accused Pawan. The applicant does not deserve
to be extended benefit of anticipatory bail. However, after going through the
case diary, he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the
applicant.
According to the material on the case diary, Ashwin Jain submitted a
written complaint on 21.2.2025 to SHO P.S. Agar Malwa that Pawan Jain
approached him to purchase Soyabean produce. He provided three truck load
of Soyabean produce to Pawan Jain from local farmers on commission.
Pawan Jain forwarded those trucks to Soyug Private Limited Bundi in
Rajasthan, but did not pay the amount of Soyabean to the farmers. Later,
Pawan Jain fled away. On such allegations, the Police Station Agar
registered FIR for the offence punishable under Section 316(5) of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita against Pawan Jain. Pawan Jain was apprehended on
13.1.2026. He informed that although all the trucks were weighed at Agar,
he procured a forged bill from Divyang Trading Company and Ramratan
Enterprises of Dahod and forwarded the Soyabean produce through forged
bills and bilti to Soyug Private Limited Plant Bundi in Rajasthan. The
payments of Soyabean produce were received through RTGS in the account
of Divyang Trading Company and Ramratan Enterprises. Divyang Trading
Company forwarded him Rs. 21 Lacs through Kalu Bhai of Shyamgadh and
Ramratan Enterprises forwarded him Rs. 10,50,000/- through Shailu Bhai.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4646
4 MCRC-5666-2026
He spent the money and did not pay the amount to the farmers. On such
allegations, further prosecution for offence punishable under Sections 338,
336(3), 61(2) of BNS was added. The bilti and bills of Ramratan Trading
Company were seized at the instance of Pawan and the Manager of Soyug
Private Limited. The investigation is underway. The fact remains that the
applicant did not enter into contract with Ashwin Jain. The allegation against
the applicant is to assist Pawan Jain in receipt of the money from Soyug Pvt
Ltd. There is no allegation that the applicant had kept the entire money
of Soyabean produce with him. The relevant documentary evidence has
already been seized. The applicant being Proprietor of M/S Ramratan
Enterprises is apprehending arrest in the matter. The contentions advanced by
the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly
baseless. The veracity of prosecution and the business transaction between
Soyug Pvt Ltd. and applicant will be considered after investigation at the
trial.
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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:4646
5 MCRC-5666-2026
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 - Pratik
Agrawal 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. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac 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:4646
6 MCRC-5666-2026
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
