Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Mahesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 April, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
(@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5178/2025)
MAHESH ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. ….RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This criminal appeal challenges the order dated
18.02.2025 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh
bench at Indore, in IA No. 8533/2024 filed in CRA No.
259/2023, whereby the complainant’s application for
recall of bail order dated 24.01.2023 was allowed and
suspension of sentence earlier granted to the appellant
herein was cancelled.
The appellant Mahesh had been facing trial in
connection with a crime registered pursuant to First
Information Report 432/2021 dated 22.11.2021 lodged
with Police Station Nalkheda, District Agar Malwa and
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU SACHDEVA
Date: 2026.04.20
in respect of offences punishable under Sections 457(1)
16:54:36 IST
Reason:
and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [in short “IPC”]
1
and Sections 7, 8, 9(n) and 10 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [in short
“POCSO Act”]. The trial court convicted the appellant
for the offences under Section 457 and 354 of IPC and
acquitted him for offences under Sections 7, 8, 9(n)
and 10 of POCSO Act vide judgment dated 26.12.2022 and
awarded a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a
period of one year, along with a fine of Rs. 500/-, for
the offence under Section 457 of IPC, and a sentence of
rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, along
with fine of Rs. 2000/-, for the offence under Section
354 of IPC.
The appellant, being aggrieved by the order of
conviction passed by the trial court, filed a criminal
appeal being CRA No. 259/2023 before the High Court and
the same is pending before the High Court. During the
pendency of the said criminal appeal, the appellant
filed IA No. 169/2023 before the High Court, seeking
suspension of sentence. The High Court, vide order
dated 24.01.2023, allowed the application filed by the
appellant for suspension of sentence. Being aggrieved,
the complainant filed IA No. 8533/2024 before the High
Court for recall of order dated 24.01.2023 and for
cancellation of the said order granting suspension of
2
sentence. The High Court, by the impugned order dated
18.02.2025, allowed the application for recall and
cancelled the suspension of sentence granted to the
appellant herein. Hence, the present criminal appeal.
By order dated 24.03.2025, this Court passed the
following order:
“Issue notice to the respondent, returnable on
21.04.2025.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is also
permitted to serve the standing counsel for the
respondent/State.
Till the next date of hearing, no coercive steps
shall be taken as against the petitioner
herein.”
We have heard learned senior counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel for the respondent(s) and
perused the material on record.
Learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that
the appellant has been convicted, inter alia, under
Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “IPC”)
and has been sentenced to two years of rigorous
imprisonment. Assailing the said judgment of conviction
and sentence, the appellant herein has preferred CRA
No.259 of 2023 before the Madhya Pradesh High Court,
Indore Bench wherein an application was also filed for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail which which
was allowed by order dated 24.01.2023. However, by the
3
impugned order, the High Court has recalled the
aforesaid order and cancelled the bail. Hence, this
appeal.
Learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted
that appellant is a labourer working at Indore and
merely because there may have been a breach of one of
the conditions imposed, the
High Court would not have passed the impugned order
canceling the relief of bail; that this Court by
interim order dated 24.03.2025 has observed that no
coercive steps may be taken as against the appellant
herein. The said interim order may be made absolute
subject to any other condition that this Court may
impose by setting aside the impugned order.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
State with reference to his counter affidavit contended
that both the conditions imposed by the High Court have
been breached by the appellant herein inasmuch as the
appellant has not been reporting before the concerned
Police Station as required under Condition No.1 and
further the appellant has also threatened the
complainant. In the circumstances, the High Court was
justified in passing the impugned order and there is no
merit in this appeal.
4
In view of the above discussion, we set aside the
impugned order and restore the earlier order dated
24.01.2023 by allowing this appeal
We direct that the appellant shall extend
complete cooperation in the hearing of the appeal
before the High Court. The appellant shall not misuse
his liberty in any manner.
The appellant shall also not make any attempt to
contact the complainant in any manner whatsoever.
With these observations, the criminal appeal is
allowed.
………………………………………J.
[B.V. NAGARATHNA]
….……………………………………J.
[UJJAL BHUYAN]
NEW DELHI
APRIL 20, 2026
5
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-E
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5178/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18-02-2025
in IA No. 8533/2024 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at
Indore]
MAHESH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. Respondent(s)
IA No. 86134/2025 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 20-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANFor Petitioner(s) :Mr. N.K. Mody, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Ishita M Puranik, Adv.
Ms. Jigisha Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Aniya, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Rudraditya Khare, D.A.G.
Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR
Ms. Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Tomar, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The Appeal is allowed in terms of the signed
order.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
(NEETU SACHDEVA) (DIVYA BABBAR) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)
(signed order is placed on the file)
6
[ad_1]
Source link
