[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balwant Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2026
1 CRA-920-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 24th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 81 of 2026
RAMVISHAL YADAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Mr. Shubham Mishra - Advocate for
appellant.
Ms. Vineeta Shrama - Dy. G.A. for State.
Ms. Vindhyeshwari Palha - Advocate for objector.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 213 of 2026
PARSHOTTAM @ RAMSAHAY AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Mr. Sankalp Kochar and Mr. Shahnawaz Khan - Advocates for appellants.
Ms. Vineeta Shrama - Dy. G.A. for State.
Ms. Vindhyeshwari Palha - Advocate for objector.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 920 of 2026
BALWANT AHIRWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Ashok Kumar Chourasiya - Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Vineeta Shrama - Dy. G.A. for State.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANIL
CHOUDHARY
Signing time: 2/24/2026
8:08:26 PM
2 CRA-920-2026
Ms. Vindhyeshwari Palha - Advocate for objector.
ORDER
After arguing at length, the learned counsel appearing in CRA No.213
of 2026 seeks withdrawal of the appeal in respect of appellant No.1-
Parshottam @ Ramsahay.
Prayer is allowed.
The CRA No.213 of 2026 is dismissed as withdrawn in respect of the
said appellant.
Accordingly, these appeals are being considered in respect of
appellants, namely, Ramcharan, Ramvilas and Balwant.
The appellants have filed these first criminal appeals under Section
14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by orders dated 29.12.2025,
31.12.2025 and 19.01.2026 respectively passed in SC ATR No.251/2025 and
Bail Application No.450/2025 respectively by the Special Judge, SC/ST
(POA) Act, Raisen (M.P.), whereby their bail applications filed under
Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, have been rejected.
2. The present appellants have been arrested on 30.09.2025 and
17.12.2025 respectively relating to FIR/Crime No.152/2025 registered at
Police Station Sultanganj, District Raisen (M.P.) for offence punishable
under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(vi) of
the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the present appellants have
submitted that appellant-Ramvilas is in custody since 17.12.2025 whereas
3 CRA-920-2026
appellant-Ramcharan and Balwant are in custody since 30.09.2025. They are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence
on record against the present appellants. Admittedly no ocular evidence is
there. Only circumstantial evidence has been collected by the prosecution.
Moreover, the circumstantial evidence is in the forma of last seen together,
which is against co-accused/Parshottam @ Ramsahay, not against the present
appellants. The present appellants have been arrested on the basis of
memorandum of co-accused Parshottam, which is inadmissible in evidence.
Though from the possession of appellants, Ramvilas and Balwant, some
pieces of electric wires have been seized while shoes of the deceased have
been seized at the instance of appellant-Ramcharan, but pieces of wires do
not connect the present appellants with the incident. As far as the shoes of
the deceased are concerned, they were seized from open place and, therefore,
it cannot be said to be a cogent evidence against appellant-Ramcharan. It is
further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed. No custodial
interrogation of the present appellants is required. They have no criminal
antecedents. The appellants are ready to comply with the conditions as may
be imposed by this Court. The conclusion of trial will take considerable time.
In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is prayed that the appellants may be
released on bail.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for State as well as objector has opposed
the prayer of bail and prayed for rejection of appeals/bail applications.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the
4 CRA-920-2026
parties and keeping in view the attending facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court is inclined to release the appellants on bail. Thus, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, these appeals are allowed. It
is directed that appellants, namely, Ramcharan, Ramvilas and Balwant be
released on bail upon their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial
Court/Committal Court.
7. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the appellants :-
"i) The appellants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by them;
ii) The appellants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii) The appellants will not indulge themselves 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 Officer, as the case may be;
iv) The appellants will not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which they are accused;
v) The appellants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial;
vi) The appellants will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and
5 CRA-920-2026
vii) If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, then this order shall
lose its effect automatically."
8. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance by the office of this Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
ac/-
