Absence of Weapon Use and Simple Nature of Injuries Warrant Grant of Regular Bail.

The applicant, Lalit Malviya @ Yogesh, filed a first bail application following his arrest on February 14, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 39 of 2026 at P.S. Shujalpur City.

The prosecution alleges that on February 5, 2026, several co-accused intercepted the complainants near Shujalpur Bus Stand over a loan installment dispute, resulting in a physical altercation where the applicant joined others in verbally abusing the complainants while co-accused Chetan and Vijendra inflicted injuries with a knife and stone.

The applicant contended that the scuffle was minor and that he was falsely implicated with exaggerated "loot" allegations.

Medical reports indicated the injuries sustained by the victims were simple in nature.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of his involvement and the duration of his judicial custody.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail.

The court evaluated the gravity of the offences charged under Sections 109(1) (Punishment of abetment), 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt), 296(b) (Obscene acts/songs), 126(2) (Wrongful restraint), 310(1) (Robbery), and 3(5) (Joint liability) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The court also relied on established principles of criminal jurisprudence regarding the avoidance of prolonged pre-trial incarceration for young applicants without prior convictions.

The court observed that while the applicant was present at the scene, the primary allegations of assault with weapons (knife and stone) were attributed to co-accused Vijendra and Chetan, not the applicant.

Furthermore, the medical evidence confirmed that the injuries were "simple in nature".

The court noted that the investigation regarding the applicant was largely complete, and there was no evidence suggesting that the 22-year-old applicant would flee from justice, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses, especially given his socio-economic status and lack of prior convictions.

The court found that the applicant's contention regarding the exaggeration of facts for the purpose of increasing the gravity of the offence had prima-facie merit.

The holding was based on the finding that there was no "compelling reason to continue incarceration" of the young applicant.

The bail is subject to conditions including regular court attendance, non-repetition of similar offences, and non-interference with witnesses or evidence.