[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kuver Singh Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10235
1 CRA-2568-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
ON THE 25th OF MARCH, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2568 of 2026
KUVER SINGH LODHI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ranjeet Singh Rawat - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Brajesh Kumar Tyagi - P.P. for the respondent No.1/State.
ORDER
This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A) (2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
being aggrieved by order dated 25.02.2026 passed by the Special Judge
(Atrocities), District Vidisha whereby bail application u/S 483 of BNSS of
appellant has been rejected.
2. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the victim has been
informed about filing of this appeal in compliance with mandate of Section
15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. The appellant has been arrested on 19.01.2026 in relation to Crime
No.34/2025 registered at Police Station Mahila, District Vidisha (M.P.) for
offence punishable under Sections 64, 64 (2) (m), 332 (b), 351 (2) of BNS
and Section 3(1)(w) (i), 3(2)(v), 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10235
2 CRA-2568-2026
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent
and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He has not committed any
crime. He is in custody since 19.01.2026. It is further submitted that the date
of incident is 14.02.2024 whereas the FIR has been lodged on 16.09.2025.
The investigation in the matter is complete and the charge sheet has been
filed on 23.2.2026. The prosecutrix is aged about 40 years. He submits that
the delay in lodging of FIR is unexplained in the FIR. The appellant has been
falsely implicated and therefore, prayer for enlargement on bail is made.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for State opposes the appeal
and submits that the complaint made against the appellant indicates
continuous cause of action and prayed for its dismissal.
6. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties and the fact that the appellant is in custody since 19.01.2026 and the
investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed, the impugned
order dated 25.02.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities),
District Vidisha (M.P.) is hereby set aside. Accordingly, without
commenting upon the merits of the case, the appeal stands allowed and the
appellant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond
in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Committal
Court.
8. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:10235
3 CRA-2568-2026
following conditions by the appellant :-
i) The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by him;
ii) The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii) The appellant 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer,
as the case may be;
iv) The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and
v) The appellant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat
the offence in future. In case offence of same nature is repeated, this bail
order shall automatically stand cancelled;
vi) The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
9 . Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
10. Certified copy as per rules.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
Van
