[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramendra Singh Parmar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3764
1 MCRC-4597-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 30th OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4597 of 2026
RAMENDRA SINGH PARMAR AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Jai Prakash Mishra - Advocate for applicants.
Shri Mohit Shivhare - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is first application filed by the applicants under Section 482 of
BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime
No.796/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali District Datia for offence
punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of BNS.
The allegation against the present applicants is that they dishonestly
misappropriated an amount of approximately Rs. 21,56,330/-.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended
that the applicants had entered into a lawful agreement with the complainant.
Pursuant thereto, a civil dispute arose between the parties and the
complainant filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, which came to be rejected vide order dated
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3764
2 MCRC-4597-2026
08.09.2025. It is further submitted that only after the rejection of the said
civil application, the present criminal case has been lodged, which clearly
demonstrates that the criminal machinery has been set into motion with an
oblique motive to pressurize the applicant. The complainant is deliberately
attempting to give a criminal colour to a purely civil dispute. There is no
likelihood of the applicants' absconding or tampering with prosecution
evidence or influencing witnesses in any manner. The applicants are ready
and willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. In
view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, it is prayed that this Court
may be pleased to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature of allegations, without commenting on the merits of the case, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the applicants have made out a case
for grant of anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants
shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for their
appearance before it during the course of investigation or before the trial
Court concerned during trial, as the case may be.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3764
3 MCRC-4597-2026
following conditions by the applicants :-
(i) The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by them;
ii) The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii) The applicants 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 applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial;
v) The applicants shall not commit any other offence during the period
of bail;
vi) The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station concerned
for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
