[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jignesh Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8738
1 MCRC-9181-2026
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. 9181 of 2026
JIGNESH PRAJAPATI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Gaurav Mishra - Advocate for applicant.
Shri Rajeev Shrivastava - Special Public Prosecutor for respondent.
ORDER
The present first application under Section 482 of BNSS has been filed
by the applicant seeking grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime
No.12/2026 registered at Police Station E.O.W. District Gwalior (M.P.) for
the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2),
61 (2) of B.N.S. 2023.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the present
applicant is identical and akin to that of co-accused Deepmala Mishra, who
has been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated
11.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.6422 of 2026. 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
similar footing to that of co-accused Deepmala Mishra who has already been
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8738
2 MCRC-9181-2026
granted benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court.
Heard counsel for parties and perused the case diary.
The case of the applicant appears to be similar to that of co-accused
Deepmala Mishra who has been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by this
Court vide order dated 11.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.6422 of 2026. In
the absence of any distinguishing feature pointed out by the prosecution and
in view of the principle of parity, this Court sees no reason to take a different
view from that taken in the case of the aforesaid co-accused.
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 conditions of the
bond executed by him;
ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8738
3 MCRC-9181-2026
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 offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused;
vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
vii) The applicant would not involve in any criminal activity in future
otherwise, benefit of bail shall immediately be withdrawn.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station concerned
for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
