Vivek Patil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2026 Latest Caselaw 950 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vivek Patil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2026

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3798




                                                             1                            MCRC-4464-2026
                             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. 4464 of 2026
                                                      VIVEK PATIL
                                                         Versus
                                             THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey - Advocate for the applicant.
                                  Ms. Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for the State.
                                  Shri Rajiv Budholiya - Advocate for teh complainant.

                                                                 ORDER

This is the fourth bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) filed by the applicant seeking grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested on 10.02.2025 in connection with Crime No. 919/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali District Datia, for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS read with Section 66-D of IT Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the case of the present applicant is akin to the case of co-accused, namely, Tahir Kolmbowala, who has been granted benefit of regaular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.58233 of 2025, therefore, claiming parity, it is prayed that the present application be allowed and benefit of bail be also granted to the applicant.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3798

2 MCRC-4464-2026 On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not dispute the factum of parity with the above said co-accused.

Heard counsel for parties and perused the case diary. The case of the applicant appears to be similar to the case of Tahir Kolmbowala, who has been granted benefit of regaular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.58233 of 2025. Thus, there is no reason to take a different view than the one taken in the case of above said co- accused.

In view of above and looking to the fact that the material placed on record does not disclose the possibility of the applicant's fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), along with one solvent surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, for his appearance on the dates fixed by the said 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

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3798

3 MCRC-4464-2026 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;

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.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. Certified copy as per rules.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE

pwn*