[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sourabh Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 March, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23888
1 CRA-2542-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 23rd OF MARCH, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2542 of 2026
SOURABH THAKUR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ghanshyam Pandey - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Pravalagn Pandey - Public Prosecutor for State.
Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra - Advocate for objector.
ORDER
1. The appellant has filed this first criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1)
of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 being aggrieved by order dated 10.3.2026 passed by Special Judge (
under SC & ST Act), Jabalpur(M.P.), whereby bail application u/S 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 of appellant has been rejected. The
appellant is in custody since 9.1.2026. Earlier bail applications were
dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 13.2.2026 and 24.2.2026 passed in
MCRC No. 7343/2026 and 8790/2026. The present appeal was filed as
prosecution for offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(1)(v)
of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was added at the time of
filing of the final report.
2. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant has filed
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23888
2 CRA-2542-2026
present criminal appeal for grant of bail to the appellant in connection
with Crime No. 15/2026 registered by P.S. Sanjeevni Nagar, Jabalpur
District - Jabalpur (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections
115(2), 118(1), 119(1), 296(A), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS 2023 and
Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(1)(v) of the SC & ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the State submits that intimation u/S 15A of
SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been given to the complainant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant in addition to the grounds
mentioned in the appeal memo submits that it is a case of friendly quarrel
between the friends. The matter has been amicably settled. Co-accused
Satpal Singh, Sharad and Sonu have been extended benefit of bail. The
final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. There is
no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the appellant. No criminal
antecedent is reported against the appellant. The trial would take time to
conclude. The appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial. On these grounds,
learned Counsel prays that learned Special Judge has committed an error in
rejecting the application for bail, therefore, the impugned order be set aside
and the appellant may be extended the benefit of bail.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application
on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going
through the case diary, he fairly submits that no criminal antecedent is
reported against the appellant. Appellant is aged around 29 years, he is a
labourer by profession and has responsibility of aged parents.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23888
3 CRA-2542-2026
6. Learned counsel for objector pleads "no objection" to grant of bail.
7. Heard the rival contentions of the parties, perused the grounds for
grant of bail stated in the appeal and the case diary.
8. As per accusation on case diary, Shailendra Manjhi reported to the
Police Station Sanjeevani Nagar that on 7.1.2026 around 9:30 in the evening,
Satpal Thakur, Sharad Thakur, Saurabh Thakur and Sonu Burman
intercepted him and demanded Rs. 500 to consume liquor. When he
declined, accused threatened and abused him in filthy language and assaulted
him with kick and fist. Saurabh Thakur assaulted Vikash Choudhary with
beer bottle on his head. He and Vikas sustained injury. Accused threatened
to kill them. Later, prosecution for offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s) & 3(1)(v) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was
added. The final report was submitted on completion of investigation.
The trial would take time to conclude. The contentions advanced by the
appellant have prima facie merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly
baseless. The veracity of prosecution and complicity of appellant will be
decided after evidence in trial. The trial court committed impropriety in
rejecting the application for bail in view of above facts.
9. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the
case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the merits,
while setting aside the order dated 10.3.2026 passed by the trial Court, this
Court is inclined to release the appellant on bail. Thus, the appeal is allowed.
10. Accordingly, it is directed that the appellant - Sourabh
Thakur shall be released on bail in connection with Crime as mentioned
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23888
4 CRA-2542-2026
in para 2 of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the
same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the
following conditions, : (For convenience of understanding by accused and
surety, the conditions of bail are also reproduced in Hindi as under):-
(1) Appellant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may
be directed by the concerned court;
(1) vkosnd lacaf/kr U;k;ky; ds funZs'kkuqlkj lquokbZ dh izR;sd frfFk ij mifLFkr
jgsxkA
(2) Appellant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of
similar nature;
(2) vkosnd leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxk ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha
gksxkA
(3) Appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade them/him/her from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to the police officer;
(3) vkosnd izdzj.k ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh O;fDr dks izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i
ls izyksHku] /kedh ;k opu ugha nsxk] ftlls ,slk O;fDr ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky;
;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh dks izdV djus ls fuokfjr gksA
(4) Appellant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper
with the evidence or allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) vkosnd izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls lk{; ds lkFk NsMNkM djus dk ;k lk{kh
;k lkf{k;ksa dks cgykus&Qqlykus] ncko Mkyus ;k /kedkus dk iz;kl ugha djsxkA
(5) During trial, the appellant shall ensure due compliance of
provisions of Section 309 of Cr.P.C. regarding examination of
witnesses in attendance;
(5) fopkj.k ds nkSjku] mifLFkr xokgksa ls ijh{k.k ds laca/k esa vkosnd /kkjk 309 na-
iz-la- ds izko/kkuksa dk mfpr vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djsxkA
This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of breach
of any of the preconditions of bail, the trial Court may consider on merit
cancellation of bail without any impediment of this order.
11. The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the personal
bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of
them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he had explained the
conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23888
5 CRA-2542-2026
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
BDJ
