HCMONTHLY CASE LAW ARCHIVE

Madhya Pradesh High Court Judgments in May 2026: Case Law Digest

Read 213 LawLens analyses of Madhya Pradesh High Court judgments published in May 2026, covering key rulings, legal principles and case law.

← BACK TO MADHYA PRADESH COURT REPORT

PERMANENT MONTHLY EDITIONS

Browse by month

AUTOMATICALLY UPDATED

May 2026 Judgments

213 ARTICLES · NEWEST FIRST
### Registration under PCPNDT Act is Equipment-Specific; Deemed Renewal of Clinic Registration Does Not Authorize New Machine Installation. Summary: The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of charges under Section 3B of the PCPNDT Act. The petitioners, employees of a medical technology company, supplied an ultrasound machine ("BPL Alpinion Ecube8LE") to a hospital that held an expired registration for a different model ("SONOTECH ST9"). The Court held that registration under the PCPNDT Act is equipment-specific, not institution-centric. Referring to Rule 13 and Forms A & B, the Court clarified that any change in equipment must be specifically authorized by the Appropriate Authority. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the "deemed renewal" of a clinic’s registration under Rule 8(6) applies only to existing authorized equipment and cannot be stretched to legalize the installation of a new, unregistered machine. Since the petitioners were experienced suppliers, the plea of lack of *mens rea* was rejected, affirming their statutory obligation to ensure valid, machine-specific registration prior to supply.. Sanjay Sinha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh High Court. LawLens

Madhya Pradesh High Court·

Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

### Registration under PCPNDT Act is Equipment-Specific; Deemed Renewal of Clinic Registration Does Not Authorize New Machine Installation. Summary: The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of charges under Section 3B of the PCPNDT Act. The petitioners, employees of a medical technology company, supplied an ultrasound machine ("BPL Alpinion Ecube8LE") to a hospital that held an expired registration for a different model ("SONOTECH ST9"). The Court held that registration under the PCPNDT Act is equipment-specific, not institution-centric. Referring to Rule 13 and Forms A & B, the Court clarified that any change in equipment must be specifically authorized by the Appropriate Authority. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the "deemed renewal" of a clinic’s registration under Rule 8(6) applies only to existing authorized equipment and cannot be stretched to legalize the installation of a new, unregistered machine. Since the petitioners were experienced suppliers, the plea of lack of *mens rea* was rejected, affirming their statutory obligation to ensure valid, machine-specific registration prior to supply.

The petitioners, employees of BPL Medical Technologies Pvt. Ltd., supplied a “BPL Alpinion Ecube8LE” ultrasound machine to Karuna Hospital, Betul, following a purchase order dated July 29, 2021

2 MIN READ

### Anticipatory Bail Granted to Octogenarian Professional Where Case Is Based Primarily on Documentary Evidence Summary of the Judgment: The High Court of Madhya Pradesh granted anticipatory bail to a 78-year-old practicing lawyer accused of forgery and fraud involving loans totaling approximately ₹4 crores and unauthorized land partitions. The complainant, the applicant’s brother, alleged that his signatures were forged to register a society, obtain bank loans, and file partition deeds. In allowing the application under Section 482 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the Court emphasized the following parameters: * Nature of Evidence: Since the allegations pertain to the creation of forged documents, the case is predominantly based on documentary evidence, reducing the necessity for custodial interrogation. * Personal Circumstances: The applicant's advanced age (78 years) and professional standing as a lawyer were significant factors in assessing the risk of fleeing from justice. * Judicial Precedent: The Court relied on *Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)* and *Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI*, reiterating that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially when the accused is willing to cooperate with the investigation. * Mediation: Noting the fraternal relationship between the parties, the Court encouraged amicable settlement through mediation despite the seriousness of the criminal charges. The applicant was released on a personal bond of ₹50,000, subject to strict conditions of investigative cooperation and non-interference with witnesses.. Narayan Prasad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh High Court. LawLens

Madhya Pradesh High Court·

Criminal Procedure and EvidenceCriminal Law

### Anticipatory Bail Granted to Octogenarian Professional Where Case Is Based Primarily on Documentary Evidence Summary of the Judgment: The High Court of Madhya Pradesh granted anticipatory bail to a 78-year-old practicing lawyer accused of forgery and fraud involving loans totaling approximately ₹4 crores and unauthorized land partitions. The complainant, the applicant’s brother, alleged that his signatures were forged to register a society, obtain bank loans, and file partition deeds. In allowing the application under Section 482 of Bharitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the Court emphasized the following parameters: * Nature of Evidence: Since the allegations pertain to the creation of forged documents, the case is predominantly based on documentary evidence, reducing the necessity for custodial interrogation. * Personal Circumstances: The applicant's advanced age (78 years) and professional standing as a lawyer were significant factors in assessing the risk of fleeing from justice. * Judicial Precedent: The Court relied on *Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)* and *Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI*, reiterating that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially when the accused is willing to cooperate with the investigation. * Mediation: Noting the fraternal relationship between the parties, the Court encouraged amicable settlement through mediation despite the seriousness of the criminal charges. The applicant was released on a personal bond of ₹50,000, subject to strict conditions of investigative cooperation and non-interference with witnesses.

The applicant, a 78-year-old practicing advocate, sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 206/2026 registered at P.S. Shajapur Kotwali for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC.

2 MIN READ