[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Virendra Singh Bhati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:34439
1 MCRC-19157-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 4 th OF MAY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 19157 of 2026
VIRENDRA SINGH BHATI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Jagat Singh - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Pankaj Raj - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with Crime No.79/2026 registered at Police Station Ashta,
District Sehore (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4),
336(3) and 338 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the basic
dispute arose due to certain commercial transactions, as the applicant was the
original owner of Plot No. 171/3/3/1, Survey No. 171/3/3/1/2, admeasuring
0.022 hectares of land, is stated to have been sold by the applicant to the
complainant that was as a security of the business. There was a business
between the applicant and the husband of the complainant, and when the
business was not going smoothly, it was closed. There were multiple
partners, and their accounts have to be settled. In between, it was agreed that
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:34439
2 MCRC-19157-2026
the complainant would transfer the land. It is submitted that a cheque was
issued by Capri Global Housing Finance Limited, not by the applicant. There
was a transaction between Capri Global Housing Finance Limited and the
complainant. It is further submitted that the complainant, on the same cause
of action, has submitted a civil suit that has been registered by the Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Ashta, Sehore. The same relief has been claimed
therein, and on the same grounds, without approaching the police, a
complaint has been filed. The Magistrate's Court, without hearing the
parties, has directed to lodge the FIR. In these circumstances, it is a purely
civil matter, and the process of law is being misused, hence, the applicant be
granted the benefit of anticipatory bail.
3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and
submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory
bail.
4. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
5. Looking to the factual aspect of the case and the fact that a civil suit
is also pending regarding the transactions, this Court deems it fit to enlarge
the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, without commenting anything on
the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
6. It is directed that in the event of arrest the applicant shall be
enlarged on bail on his 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 Arresting Officer for his appearance before him during
the course of investigation or before the trial Court concerned during trial, as
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:34439
3 MCRC-19157-2026
the case may be.
7. The applicant is directed to cooperate with the investigating agency
and also appear on the date and time directed by the Investigating Officer.
8. The applicant is directed that if police authority demands, he shall
give his specimen signatures.
9. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly induce or threaten any
prosecution witness.
10. The applicant will regularly appear before the trial Court and
cooperate till disposal of this case.
11. It is further directed that the applicants shall abide by all the
conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
12. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
VB*
