Prolonged Custody Without Trial Conclusion Warrants Bail Under BNSS: MP High Court

The Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has reinforced the principle of liberty by granting bail to an accused facing serious assault charges, emphasizing that the potential for a lengthy trial justifies release when the investigation is near completion. The court underscored that where custodial interrogation is no longer requisite and the accused possesses deep roots in the community, continued incarceration serves no punitive purpose during the pre-trial stage.

In a hearing before Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta, the court considered the third bail application of an individual accused of causing an ear injury with an axe. The bench weighed the nature of the allegations against the procedural status of the case, specifically noting the parity with a co-accused already released on bail.

Judicial Discretion and Parity in Assault Cases

The applicant moved the court under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. after previous applications were withdrawn. The prosecution alleged that the applicant inflicted an injury on the ear of the victim using an axe, leading to the registration of an FIR involving various sections of the BNS. The court noted that the offence is triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) and that the applicant had been in custody since June 2026.

The Court has following directions:

"i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him/her;

ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation /trial, as the case may be;

iii) The applicant will not indulge himself/herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such acts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

iv) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future.

vi) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

vii) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be."

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "Considering the above submissions made by the counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed... Investigation is almost over and charge-sheet is likely to be filed... Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time."

Background

The dispute originated from an incident leading to Crime No. 09/2025 at Police Station Mehgaon, involving offences ranging from obscene acts to causing grievous hurt. The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant was falsely implicated and that no further custodial interrogation was required. It was specifically highlighted that a co-accused had been granted bail by the High Court in July 2025. The State opposed the bail, citing the nature of the weapon used. However, the Court found that since the applicant is a permanent resident of Bhind and the trial would be prolonged, bail was appropriate subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000.

Case Details:
Case No.: MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 50182 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:MPHC-GWL:33621
Case Title: Som Alias Sameer Rathore Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Rajmani Bansal - Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Samar Ghuraiya - Dy. Govt. Advocate

Source: 2026 CaseBase(MP) 36549