[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sameer Alias Gullad Alias Javed vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3802
1 MCRC-4849-2026
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. 4849 of 2026
SAMEER ALIAS GULLAD ALIAS JAVED
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Pradeep Katare - Advocate for applicant.
Ms Kalpana Parmar - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 15.12.2025 by Police Station-
Daboh, District Bhind in connection with Crime No.170/2025, registered in
relation to the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m), 332(B),
351(3) of BNS.
The allegation against the present applicant is that he trespassed into
the house of prosecutrix and repeatedly committed rape upon her on different
occasions.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as
alleged. It is contended that the prosecutrix is a married adult woman and the
mother of two children. The applicant is a neighbor of the prosecutrix, and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3802
2 MCRC-4849-2026
there exists a dispute between them with regard to certain monetary
transactions. Owing to the said dispute, the present false case has been
lodged against the applicant. After completion of investigation, the charge-
sheet has already been filed, and therefore, no further custodial interrogation
of the applicant is required. The trial is likely to take considerable time for its
conclusion. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Bhind and there
is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution
evidence. The applicant undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions
as may be imposed by this Court. In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is
most humbly prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application
and submits that statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183
BNSS is consistent and duly supported by other material collected during
investigation. Therefore, the State prays for dismissal of the bail application.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
Taking into account the overall facts and circumstances of the case
coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and
prolonged pre- trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty,
this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,
this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on
bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3802
3 MCRC-4849-2026
the concerned Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer,
as the case may be;
4 . The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency
of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically,
without further reference to the Bench;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
