High Court emphasizes the gravity of the offence and ongoing investigation, refuses bail citing deliberate obstruction of official duties.
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has denied bail to Munendra Singh, who is accused of being involved in a serious assault on a police constable during an NSG mock drill in Gwalior. The decision, delivered by Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke, underscores the court's stance on maintaining public order and ensuring the integrity of ongoing investigations.
The incident, which occurred on the night of February 4, 2026, involved a police constable, Ravi Kumar Vimal, who was on duty at a traffic management post. The police claim that a white Honda Amaze, driven rashly, failed to stop when signaled, leading to a confrontation where the constable was allegedly pulled onto the vehicle's bonnet and dragged, causing him significant injuries.
Munendra Singh, one of the vehicle's occupants, argued through his counsel, Shri Awdhesh Singh Bhadauria, that he was merely a passenger and had no active role in the incident. However, the prosecution contended that Singh was actively involved in obstructing the public servant and posed a threat to public order.
The court, in its detailed judgment, cited the gravity of the allegations, particularly the assault on a police constable during a sensitive security arrangement. The court noted that the incident went beyond mere rash driving and appeared to be a deliberate act to deter a public servant from performing his duties. The ongoing investigation and the potential impact on public administration were also key factors in the court's decision to deny bail.
Moreover, the court referred to the principles laid down in the Supreme Court's judgment in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, emphasizing that bail is not automatically granted where the investigation is substantially complete, especially in cases involving serious allegations against public servants.
In a related development, the court took serious note of the conduct of Munendra Singh's counsel, Shri Awdhesh Singh Bhadauria, who has previously been held guilty of criminal contempt. The court issued a show-cause notice to Bhadauria for appearing in court without purging the contempt, as required by Rule 16 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Conditions of Practice) Rules, 2012. The court directed the State Bar Council to report on the steps taken regarding Bhadauria's conduct and compliance with the court's orders.
The decision highlights the court's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is served while maintaining the decorum and authority of the judicial process.
Bottom Line:
Bail application dismissed due to the gravity of allegations, ongoing investigation, and the alleged involvement of the applicant in a deliberate and concerted act against a police constable during discharge of official duties.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 132, 121(1), 127(2), 281, 125A, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Articles 215 and 129 of the Constitution of India.
Munendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Gwalior) : Law Finder Doc id # 2860536
