[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17186
1 MCRC-6822-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
ON THE 27th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6822 of 2026
RAHUL PRAJAPATI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Gyan Prakash Tripathi - Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Himanshu Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
This is first application filed by the applicants under Section 483 of
the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail relating
to FIR/Crime No.32/2026 registered at Police Station - Ghamapur, District -
Jabalpur for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 118 (1) 351 (2), 119
(1) of the BNS, 2023. The applicants are in custody since 19.01.2026.
2. As per prosecution story, the complainant Rahul Prajapati stated
that on 12.01.2026 at about 12:30 midnight, he was present at his house. At
that time, Dipu @Chilli @ Devendra Prajapati, Rahul Prajapati and Pintu
Prajapati were shouting near his house. When the complainant came out of
his house, Dipu @ Chilli @ Devendra Prajapati demanded a sum of Rs.
500/- for consuming liquor. Upon refusal to give the said amount, Pintu
Prajapati and Rahul Prajapati allegedly abused the complainant with filthy
language and caught hold of him and assaulted him by fists and blows
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17186
2 MCRC-6822-2026
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and they have been falsely implicated. Even from perusal of the
FIR it is apparent that allegation against the present applicants is only that
they caught hold of the complainant. The allegation against them is that they
assaulted the complainant by fists and kicks. The applicants are in custody
since 19.01.2026 and by this time investigation might have completed. So far
as injury with a knife is concerned, it is attributed to another person, namely,
Chilli. Considering their young age, discretion should be exercised in their
favour. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicants. It is further
contended that there is no possibility of their fleeing away and they will
cooperate with the trial. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be granted
benefit of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail
and submitted that the applicants have actively participated in commission of
crime. However, he submits that injury due to knife blow is attributable to
one Chilli.
5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused
the case diary. Considering the nature of injury inflicted by the present
applicants; the fact that knife blow was inflicted by some other person,
namely, Chilly; age of the present applicants and there is no criminal
antecedent; custody period coupled with the fact that trial will take a
considerable time as well as principle 'Bail is the Rule and Jail is the
exception' and Article 21 of the Constitution of India, prima facie, I am of
the view that discretion should be exercised to release the applicants on bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:17186
3 MCRC-6822-2026
Accordingly, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I deem it
a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Therefore, the application is
allowed.
6. It is directed that applicants be released on bail on their furnishing
a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only)
each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court each, for their regular appearance before the trial Court during trial
with a condition that they shall remain present before the concerned Court on
all the dates fixed by it during trial and shall co-operate in trial. They shall
abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 480(3) of BNSS, 2023.
It is further directed that the applicants shall mark their appearance before
the concerned police station on Second Thursday of each month for a period
of six months.
7 . This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of
bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become
ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT)
JUDGE
ks
