[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abhishek Bairagi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9661
1 MCRC-12771-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 18th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12771 of 2026
ABHISHEK BAIRAGI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Harshit Raghuwanshi - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Anjali Gyanani - GA for the respondent/State.
ORDER
The applicant has filed this first application under Section 483 of
BNSS for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 07.03.2026 in connection with
Crime No.64/2026 registered at Police Station Cantt. District Guna (M.P.)
for the offences punishable under Sections 112 & 238(A) of BNS and
Section 4(A) of Public Gambling Act.
The allegation against the present applicant is that he along with co-
accused persons formed a group and acted as members of a gang. During a
cricket match, they were allegedly involved in online betting and were also
facilitating betting activities for other persons, thereby committing a small
organized crime.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9661
2 MCRC-12771-2026
that the case of the present applicant is identical and akin to that of co-
accused Saurabh Raghuwanshi, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court
vide order dated 13.03.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.12075/2026. 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, she
fairly does not dispute the fact that the case of the present applicant stands on
similar footing to that of co-accused Saurabh Raghuwanshi, who has already
been granted 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
Saurabh Raghuwanshi, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide
order dated 13.03.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.12075/2026. 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.
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 commenting on merits of the case, this bail
application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand
Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the
concerned Court.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9661
3 MCRC-12771-2026
10. 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 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.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
12. Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
neetu
