[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamlesh Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9678
1 MCRC-12663-2026
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. 12663 of 2026
KAMLESH SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Pramod Kumar Pachori - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Anjali Gyanani - GA for the respondent/State.
Shri Rajmani Bansal - Advocate for the complainant.
ORDER
This is second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail. His first application has been dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 18.02.2025 in M.Cr.C. No.24858/2024.
2. The applicant has been arrested on 28.08.2023 in connection with
Crime No.524/2023 registered at Police Station Janakganj District Gwalior
for offences under Sections 302, 307, 294, 323, 324, 147, 148, 149 of IPC
and Section 25, 25-B and 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per the case of the prosecution, the accused persons due to some
previous rivalry assaulted informant's brother Lokendra Rathore, who later
called the informant on the spot. The applicant & other accused persons then
abused informant and his brother and threatened them of dire consequences
at own their residence and when they reached their residence, Kamlesh
Sharma who was having a country made pistol, Suraj Sharma having baka,
Satyadev Prakash having palta, Raja @ Rajesh Bhadoriya, Subedar Pal and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9678
2 MCRC-12663-2026
Virendra Sharma carrying wooden stick came to their house, abused them
and when the informant's brother Dilip intervened and prevented the accused
persons from abusing, Kamlesh Sharma (applicant herein) caught hold of the
hands of Dilip and Lokendra Sharma fired with an intent to commit murder
and as a result, Dilip sustained bullet injury on his back and fell down. It is
further stated in the complaint that Subedar Pal and Virendra Sharma who
had come with wooden sticks had assaulted the brothers with the sticks and
Satyadev Prakash had assaulted them with kicks and fists and after hue and
cry was raised, they left the scene of crime. The courts-below have declined
to grant' the regular bail to the appellant.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not
committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
further submitted that a perusal of the FIR shows that the only allegation
against the present applicant is that he caught hold of the hands of Dilip, to
cause fire at Lokendra which didn't fired and to give a Palta blow on the head
of Lokendra, which is simple in nature. Apart from that, there is no specific
allegation that the applicant fired the shot which caused injury to Dilip. It is
further submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 28.08.2023
and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. The charge-sheet
has already been filed and charges have also been framed. It is further
submitted that co-accused Virendra Sharma has already been granted bail by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 18.02.2026 in SLP
No.20351/2025 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of co-
accused. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9678
3 MCRC-12663-2026
bail.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed
the bail application and prayed for its rejection.
6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature
of allegations and period of custody, 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.
8. 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 of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by
the concerned Court.
9. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9678
4 MCRC-12663-2026
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
neetu
