[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ksitij Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15978
1 MCRC-5787-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 24th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5787 of 2026
KSITIJ BAGHEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Anand Nayak and Shri Akash Singhai - Advocate for the
applicant.
Shri Sunil Choubey - Advocate for the objector.
Shri Amit Garg - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
This is the third application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 for grant of regular bail relating
to FIR/Crime No.265/2025 registered at Police Station-Keolari, District-
Seoni (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3),
326(g), 324(g) of BNS. The applicant is in custody since 19.07.2025. Earlier
bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated
14.11.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.49955/2025.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is
not involved in the offence. In the FIR, the applicant has not been named.
The victim has not lodged the FIR and has also not been examined by the
Investigating Officer. The report was lodged by Anand Singh Rajput and he
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15978
2 MCRC-5787-2026
is not the eye-witness of the offence. In the CCTV footage, the applicant is
being seen on 21.05.2025 whereas the incident took place on 17.05.2025.
Thus, except the oral evidence, there is no other evidence brought on record
against the applicant. There was a dispute regarding murder of two persons
of his community and the same incident has taken place in village Keolari
and on that basis, the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case, hence,
the applicant be released on bail.
3. Learned counsel for the objector and State have opposed the bail
application and submitted that on the date of incident, many houses were
burnt in which this applicant was also involved, hence, the applicant is not
entitled to be released on bail.
4. Heard the parties and perused the record.
5. From the material available on record, it is clear that in the incident
alleged to have taken place on 17.05.2025, the house of Kamal Thakur was
burnt. Thereafter, Kamal Thakur called his brother Anand Singh Rajput and
narrated the whole story to him stating that his life is in danger, hence, he is
unable to lodge the FIR. On his instruction, Anand Singh Rajput lodged the
FIR on 19.05.2025 and thereafter, his statement got recorded. In that FIR,
this applicant has not been named as a accused. Further, the complainant is
neither an eyewitness nor he has seen the incident. From the FIR, it is clear
that the complainant is the resident of village Chhui, Police Station
Kanhiwada. No evidence of CCTV footage involving the applicant on the
date of incident i.e. 17.05.2025, has been submitted. The statements of other
witnesses have been recorded after 15 days of the incident. Neither Kamal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15978
3 MCRC-5787-2026
Singh has been made an eye-witness nor he has been examined under
Section 180 of BNSS by the Investigating Officer. So far as the applicant's
criminal record is concerned, it is noteworthy that each case stands on
separate footing and the same shall be decided as per its own merits.
6. Looking to these factual aspects of the case, coupled with the facts
that charge sheet has been submitted and trial will take time to be concluded,
this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail. Thus, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
7. It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his
furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may
be fixed by that Court in this regard during the pendency of trial.
8. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Section 480(3) of BNSS.
9. Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
HK
