[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Saurabh Goswami vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8757
1 MCRC-11384-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 13th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11384 of 2026
SAURABH GOSWAMI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Shobhendra Kumar Tiwari - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Atul Kumar Sharma - GA for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is the first application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by the applicant.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime
No.655/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Guna (M.P.) for
the offence punishable under Sections 8/20, 29 of NDPS Act.
As per prosecution case, 1 kg 806 gm of Ganja has been recovered
from the joint possession of the co-accused persons, namely Girraj and
Gaurav.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and he has not committed any offence. He has falsely implicated in the case
and all allegations which are leveled against the applicant are frivolous. The
present applicant has been made an accused on the basis of memorandum of
co-accused Girraj under Section 23(2) of Evidence Act. It is further
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8757
2 MCRC-11384-2026
submitted that the case of the present applicant is on better footing to that of
co-accused, namely, Girraj and Gaurav, who have been granted benefit of
regular bail vide order dated 09.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 58980/2025.
On the ground of parity, it is argued that the applicant is entitled to the same
relief.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail; however, he
fairly does not dispute the fact that the case of the present applicant stands on
better footing to that of co-accused, Girraj and Gaurav, who have already
been granted bail by this Court.
Heard counsel for parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the facts and circumstances brought on record and to
maintain parity, this Court is inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail
to the present applicant. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the
case, this application is allowed.
It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be
enlarged 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 Arresting Officer for his 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
following conditions by the applicant :-
(i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditons of the
bond executed by him;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8757
3 MCRC-11384-2026
ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
Officer, as the case may be;
iv) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial;
v) The applicant shall not commit any other offence during the period
of bail;
vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station concerned
for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
neetu
