[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rohit Singh Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17132
1 MCRC-9357-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY
ON THE 27 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9357 of 2026
ROHIT SINGH LODHI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur- Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Satyapal Chadhar- Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Ms. Shaifali Saraf- Advocate for the complainant.
ORDER
This is second bail application filed by the applicants under Section 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail relating to
FIR/Crime No.178/2025 registered at Police Station Mandideep, District Raisen,
for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of IPC. Applicant is in custody
since 09.10.2025.
2. Applicants' first application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated
10.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.55208/20225 with liberty to renew the prayer
after recording the statement of Rahul before the trial Court. Therefore, second
bail application has been filed after recording of statement of witness Rahul.
Statement was recorded on 19.02.2026 and copy of the statement is placed on
record.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent
and have been falsely implicated. It appears from the prosecution case that on the
very day of incident there was an altercation between the deceased and one
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17132
2 MCRC-9357-2026
Jaswant Malviya. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation,
witnesses have not been mentioned the name of any of the applicants as assailant.
Main witness Rahul has been examined, who has not supported the prosecution
case as he turned hostile. It is further submitted that even statement of the wife of
the deceased Abhilasha recorded twice by the police and also under Section 183 of
BNSS and in none of the statements, she has stated against the applicants. It is
vehemently submitted that the so-called audio recording of the incident at 08:35
pm in the mobile phone of the wife of the deceased has not been produced, not
any such recording is available to show the involvement of the present applicants
in the said offence. It is further submitted that as per FSL/CDR report, none of the
applicants' location has been found at or nearby place of the incident at the time of
occurrence. It is further submitted that as per the FSL report, with respect to the
audio recording, it is opined that the same is not sufficient for auditory and
spectrographic analysis so as to identify voice of the witness Rahul. However,
witness Rahul has not supported the prosecution case in his statement recorded
during trial. It is further submitted that the applicants are in jail since 09.10.2025
and there is no apprehension of applicant's absconding or tampering with the
prosecution evidence. Thus, it is prayed that the applicants may be released on
bail.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the bail
application. It is submitted that since the tower location of the applicants has been
found at or nearby the place of occurrence at about 6-7 pm on the date of incident
i.e. 10.04.2025, their involvement cannot be nullified. It is further submitted that
considering the nature of offence and overall evidence collected during the
investigation, applicants may not be released on bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17132
3 MCRC-9357-2026
5. Learned counsel for the objector also opposed the bail application on the
same line, however, she fairly admitted that the main witness Rahul has not
supported the prosecution case during trial and also the wife of the deceased
Abhilasha has not stated anything against the applicant in her statement recorded
during investigation as well as Section 180 and 183 of BNSS.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.
7. It is directed that the applicants namely Rohit Singh Lodhi and Rajkumar
Lodhi shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, for their appearance before the said
Court on all such dates as may be fixed during the pendency of trial.
8. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of
Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
9. Accordingly, this MCRC stands disposed of.
(RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)
JUDGE
SS
