[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kalyan Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 March, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9804
1 MCRC-11331-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 20th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11331 of 2026
KALYAN AHIRWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun - Advocate for applicant.
Ms Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS filed by the
applicant for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 29.01.2026 by Police Station- Aron
District Guna in connection with Crime No.31/2026, registered in relation to
the offence punishable under Sections 179, 180 of BNS.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the present
applicant is identical and akin to that of co-accused Vinod, who has been
enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 13.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C.
No.9765 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 Vinod, who has already been granted
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9804
2 MCRC-11331-2026
bail by this Court. The applicant criminal antecedents of two criminal cases.
Heard counsel for parties and perused the case diary.
The case of the applicant appears to be similar to that of co-accused
Vinod, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated
13.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.9765 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.
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 expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the present application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released
on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only), along with one solvent surety of the like amount, to
the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court, for his appearance on the
dates fixed by the said Court.
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,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9804
3 MCRC-11331-2026
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.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
