[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ummed Singh Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8340
1 MCRC-11050-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 10th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11050 of 2026
UMMED SINGH MEENA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Samar Ghuraiya - DGA for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is third bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 03.01.2026 by Police Station-
Mragwas, District Guna in connection with Crime No.03/2026, registered in
relation to the offence punishable under Sections 8/21 of NDPS Act.
The prosecution case in brief is that on 03.01.2026, the police party
received secret information from an informer that two persons were illegally
transporting smack in a sack with the intention to sell it near Sanai Basheda
Road. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot where
they found the present applicant along with co-accused. On seeing the police
personnel, the applicant allegedly tried to flee; however, the police
intercepted them. During search, 51.50 grams of smack was recovered from
the possession of co-accused Banwari Lal Meena, and one motorcycle was
seized from the present applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8340
2 MCRC-11050-2026
taken into custody. On the basis of the said incident, FIR at Crime No.
03/2026 has been registered against the applicant under Sections 8/21 of the
NDPS Act at Police Station Mragwas, District Guna (M.P.).
Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted
that the applicant has been in custody since 03.01.2026. As the contraband
has already been seized and the investigation is almost complete, there is no
requirement for further custodial interrogation. It is argued that the
mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with at the time of
seizure. The applicant is a permanent resident of Village- Khadiya, P.S.
Harnavada, District Baran (Raj.) and there is no likelihood of his absconding
or tampering with prosecution evidence if released on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the
application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
allegations and looking to the alleged quantity, 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 two local solvent sureties of the like amount to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8340
3 MCRC-11050-2026
satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates
given by 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 themselves 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
(aspr)
