Mahendra vs. State Of M.P.

Held

The Court allowed the bail application, without commenting on the merits of the case. The primary reasoning for granting bail was the parity with co-accused persons, Satyaraj Singh and Rajat Ajmera, who had already been granted bail by a coordinate bench. The Court also considered the fact that the applicant had been in custody since December 3, 2025, and that the charge sheet had already been filed. The Court found it significant that the respondent/State had not challenged the bail orders granted to the co-accused before the Supreme Court. The applicant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is required to be present before the trial Court during the trial and abide by the conditions under Section 437(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The Court also stipulated that if the applicant violates any terms of the bail order, an application for cancellation may be filed before the trial Court.

Facts

This is a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (akin to Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) by Mahendra, who is implicated in Crime No. 393/2025 registered at Police Station Balakwada, District Khargone. The alleged offence pertains to the manufacturing of fake fertilizers, punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The applicant has been in custody since December 3, 2025. The applicant's counsel argued that co-accused Satyaraj Singh and Rajat Ajmera were granted bail by a coordinate bench, and the applicant's case is identical. The respondent opposed bail, noting that the agreement and GST certificate were in the applicant's name, but did not deny that the State had not challenged the bail orders for co-accused before the Supreme Court. The charge sheet has been filed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the parity with co-accused who have been granted bail? Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant's case is identical to that of co-accused Satyaraj Singh and Rajat Ajmera, who have already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court. The applicant has been in custody since December 3, 2025, and the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude. Therefore, bail should be granted. Revenue's Arguments: The respondent opposed the bail application, submitting that the agreement for the alleged activity was in the applicant's name, and a GST certificate was also issued in his name, suggesting his direct involvement. However, the respondent did not deny that the bail orders for the co-accused have not been challenged by the State before the Supreme Court.