KULDEEP Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants No.1 to 3, namely, Kuldeep, Ramswaroop and Bal Singh respectively have filed this first bail application under Sec. 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail. They apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.389/2025 registered at Police Station Thatipur, District Gwalior (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Ss. 115(2), 296-A, 351(3), 190, 191(3), 118, 118(2) of BNS.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the injured Satendra Kushwah, while admitted at J.H. Hospital, gave a statement (Dehati Nalishi) that on 9/11/2025, at around 02:10 AM, he was returning to his village Thanupura. As soon as he reached near his house and got down from the vehicle, Ramendra Singh Kushwah, Shailendra @ Shailu Rajawat and three others armed with weapons, came from behind and started assaulting him with the butt of a gun while abusing him. They hit him below the knees, on the chest, chin, and face with the butt of the gun and with a pistol, due to which he sustained injuries on his chest and face. The incident was witnessed by his wife Mini Singh and neighbour Kamal Singh. While leaving, the accused were saying that if he caused trouble in the future, they would kill him. On the basis of this report, alleged crime was registered against the accused persons.

(3.) Learned counsels for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case owing to prior enmity and local rivalry. It is argued that the allegations made in the Dehati Nalishi do not attribute any specific overt act to these applicants. The complainant has merely stated that "three others" were present along with the named accused persons, but no distinct role, weapon, or act of assault has been assigned to applicants. Thus, the allegations against them are wholly omnibus, vague, and lacking in specificity. It is further submitted that, as per the panchanama and the statements of the injured witness and other witnesses recorded during investigation, the present applicants have not been identified as the assailants. This significantly weakens the prosecution story insofar as these applicants are concerned. It is also pointed out that co-accused Bharat Singh, who was attributed a similar and even more proximate role according to the FIR, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, thereby entitling the present applicants to parity in the matter of grant of anticipatory bail. It is further argued that the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature as per the preliminary medical opinion, which further reduces the seriousness of the alleged offence so far as these applicants are concerned. It is further submitted that the ingredients of the offences invoked under the BNS are not satisfied vis -vis applicants No.1 to 3, and their arrest is wholly unwarranted. The applicants are permanent residents of District Gwalior, have deep roots in society, and there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. They are cooperating with the investigation. The applicants are ready and willing to comply with any conditions imposed by this Court. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicants be granted anticipatory bail, especially in light of the non-identification during investigation and the parity arising from the grant of anticipatory bail to co-accused Bharat Singh.