Milind Ramesh Phadke, J
1. The applicant has filed this First bail application under Section 482 of BNSS/438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
2. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.44/2025 registered at Police Station Andori District Bhind (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 119(1), 115(2), 296, 351(2), 324(4), 3(5) of BNS.
3. According to the prosecution case, the complainant Rahul lodged a First Information Report stating that on 27.04.2025 he was taking a dumper bearing registration number RJ-11/GC-9068 from Gohad Chauraha to village Chandokhar to unload sand. Pradeep was accompanying him. After unloading the sand at village Chandokhar, when they were returning at about 9:50 PM, near the culvert of the canal on the main road at village Chandokhar, they met the applicants, who stopped his dumper and demanded money for consuming liquor. When he refused to give them money, the applicants abused him and all four assaulted him with fists and punches, causing injuries on his body. Thereafter, all four together broke the front windscreen and side glass of the dumper with sticks. After some time, another person also came along with the four, who also abused and assaulted him. When Pradeep tried to rescue him, those persons left the spot after threatening to kill him.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. The applicant has no criminal record. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in investigation/trial. He is ready to abide by all the terms and condition as imposed by this Court. It is further submitted that co-accused Aneesh Tomar has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 29.12.2025 in M.Cr.C. No.59387/2025 and the case of the present applicant is akin to that of co-accused. Hence, on the the ground of parity also, counsel prayed for anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. However, she fairly admits that factum of parity.
6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, without commenting upon merits of the matter, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on 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 Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer.
9. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
(i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
(ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/ trial, as the case may be;
(iii) The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence during the period of bail;
(v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
(vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
10. Application stands allowed and disposed of.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court/Police Station concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
