Vikas Giri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2026 Latest Caselaw 2365 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vikas Giri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 March, 2026

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8390




                                                             1                         MCRC-11401-2026
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                       BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                                 ON THE 11th OF MARCH, 2026
                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11401 of 2026
                                                       VIKAS GIRI
                                                         Versus
                                             THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Sushil Goswami - Advocate for the applicant.
                                  Shri Samar Ghuraiya - Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                                                 ORDER

This is the first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS/439 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 23.02.2026 in connection with Crime No.532/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Datia for offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296, 351(3), 191(2), 191(3), 3(5) of BNS.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, namely Sachin

Sharma, who has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 04.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 56060 of 2024. On the ground of parity, it is therefore prayed that the present application be allowed and the applicant be extended the benefit of bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not dispute the factum of parity with the co-accused; however, he submits that the applicant

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8390

2 MCRC-11401-2026 has three criminal antecedents.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Upon consideration of the submissions and a perusal of the case diary, it appears that the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co- accused, namely Sachin Sharma, who has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 04.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 56060 of 2024. In the absence of any distinguishing circumstances, this Court finds no reason to take a view different from the one already taken in the case of the aforesaid 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 fleeing from justice, 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 in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, 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:8390

3 MCRC-11401-2026 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 an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

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*