Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anticipatory bail is maintainable where no custodial interrogation is required and no criminal antecedents exist.

Bobby Balmik vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High CourtJUDGMENT: May 12, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, Bobby Balmik, filed his first bail application seeking anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 118/2026 registered at Police Station Gwarighat, Jabalpur.

Source reference: p. 1

The prosecution alleged that the applicant and co-accused persons engaged in an altercation with Nishant Patel, wherein they abused and assaulted him with fist blows, while co-accused Deepak allegedly used a knife.

Source reference: p. 2

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated in a minor altercation and that no weapon was used by him.

Source reference: p. 1-2

Medical reports indicated incised wounds but no acute fractures or life-threatening injuries.

Source reference: p. 2-3
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, based on the nature of allegations and lack of criminal antecedents.

Source reference: p. 1, 3
03

Law Applied

Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant anticipatory bail (analogous to Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.).

Source reference: p. 1

Penal provisions under Sections 296(A), 109(1), 351(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Source reference: p. 1-2

Principles of personal liberty, the necessity of custodial interrogation, and the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice or tampering with evidence.

Source reference: p. 3
04

Reasoning

The Court observed that the primary allegation against the applicant involved "fist blows" and that no weapon was attributed to him.

Source reference: p. 3

It noted that the medical evidence (CT Scan) showed no acute fractures and the injured was discharged after treatment.

Source reference: p. 3

The Court reasoned that custodial interrogation was unnecessary since no recovery was required from the applicant.

Source reference: p. 2-3

The Court found no evidence of criminal antecedents and determined that the applicant’s socio-economic status suggested he was not a flight risk or likely to influence witnesses.

Source reference: p. 3

The parity of the case with co-accused Mohit, who was already granted bail, also weighed in the applicant's favor.

Source reference: p. 2
05

Holding

The Court allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.

It held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety subject to conditions including cooperation with the investigation, refraining from committing similar offences, and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Source reference: p. 4

The order is effective until the conclusion of the trial.

Source reference: p. 4
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Original Court PDF

Bobby BalmikvsThe State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · May 12, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment