[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akthari Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9603
1 MCRC-11409-2026
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. 11409 of 2026
AKTHARI BAI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Samar Ghuraiya - Public Prosecutor for the State.
ORDER
This is the first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by
the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested on 13.02.2026
in connection with Crime No.42/2026 registered at Police Station Aron,
District Guna for offence punishable under Sections 8, 20 of the NDPS Act.
As per the prosecution case, 3 kilograms and 618 grams of narcotic
substance (ganja) was seized by the police from the conscious possession of
the applicant/accused, Akhtari Bai.
Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. She is in custody since
13.02.2026. It is submitted that the contraband substance recovered from the
possession or dominion of the present applicant is much below commercial
quantity. Conclusion of trial will take considerable time. The applicant is a
permanent resident of District Guna and there is no likelihood of her
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9603
2 MCRC-11409-2026
absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. On these grounds, prayer
is made to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application
and prayed for its rejection, submitting that the applicant has a criminal
antecedent, namely Crime No. 163/2012 registered under Sections 8 and 20
of the NDPS Act.
In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant
has already been acquitted in the aforesaid case and, therefore, the same
cannot be treated as an adverse criminal antecedent.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
quantity of th contraband, the nature of allegations 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. 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 her appearance on the dates given by the concerned 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 her;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9603
3 MCRC-11409-2026
investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge herself 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.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
