Virendra Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2026 Latest Caselaw 2929 MP

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2929 MP
Judgement Date : 24 March, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Virendra Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 March, 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10171

1 MCRC-12185-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 24th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12884 of 2026
SURAJ SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Naval Kishor Gupta - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Anurag Sharma - PP for the State.
Shri Rajmani Bansal- Advocate for the complainant.
WITH
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12185 of 2026
VIRENDRA SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ayush Saxena- Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Anurag Sharma - PP for the State.

Shri Rajmani Bansal- Advocate for the complainant.

ORDER

These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed by the applicants for grant of bail.

2. The applicants has been arrested on 28.08.2023 and 30.08.2023 respectively in connection with Crime No.524/2023 registered at Police Station Janakganj District Gwalior for offences under Sections 302, 307,

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10171

2 MCRC-12185-2026 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 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 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 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 applicants.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further argued that none of the applicants caused injuries to the deceased. The only allegations is of causing injury to the injured by means of Banka. They did not fire any bullet on anyone. The co-accused Kamlesh Sharma has

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10171

3 MCRC-12185-2026 already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.12663/2026, therefore, the applicants seek parity also. It is further submitted that the applicants have been in custody since 28.08.2023and 30.08.2023 and have suffered considerable pretrial confinement and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. The charge-sheet has already been filed and charges have also been framed. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection. Learned counsel for the complainant also vehemently opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection by submitting that there is sufficient material available in the case diary to implicate the present applicants.

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 ground of parity and 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 applicants.

8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this applications are allowed and it is directed that the applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each of the like amount to

the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10171

4 MCRC-12185-2026 dates given by the concerned Court.

9. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants:-

1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The applicants will not indulge themselves 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 applicants 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;