Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Manoj @ Deepak Yadav on 18 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14281
1 MCRC-26824-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY
ON THE 18th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 26824 of 2024
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Versus
MANOJ @ DEEPAK YADAV
Appearance:
Shri Satyapal Chadhar - Government Advocate for the applicant/State.
None for the respondent.
ORDER
This is an application filed by the applicant/State under Section 439(2)
of Cr.P.C for cancellation of bail order dated 14.07.2021 passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C.No.28360/2021 whereby the
respondent was granted regular bail in connection with Crime No.288/2021
registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Narsinghpur (M.P.), for the
offence punishable under Sections 294, 452, 327 & 506 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/State sanguinely submits that
since the respondent/has committed a similar type of offence for which
Crime No.623/2021, registered on 04.09.2021 at Police Station Kotwali,
District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 327,
506, 34 of IPC, Crime No.381/2022, registered on 08.05.2022 at Police
Station Kotwali, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under
Sections 294, 323, 506 of IPC, Crime No.439/2023, registered on 30.06.2023
at Police Station Kotwali, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable
under Section 13 of Public Gambling Act, 1976 and Crime No.459/2023,
registered on 05.07.2023 at Police Station Kotwali, District Narsinghpur for
the offence punishable under Sections 294, 341, 435 of IPC have been
registered against him, therefore, apparently he has violated the condition of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD SHARMA
Signing time: 19-02-2026
11:28:34
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14281
2 MCRC-26824-2024
the order dated 14.07.2021 thereby he was granted bail. Ergo, he prays that
this application may be allowed and bail granted to the respondent/accused
may be cancelled.
3. The respondent/accused was released on bail vide order dated
14.07.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.28360/2021, which contained conditions,
which reads as under:-
“It is directed that petitioner Manoj @ Deepak Yadav be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned
trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the
dates given by the concerned Court. It is further directed that
the petitioner shall comply with the provisions of Section
437(3) of Cr.P.C.”
It is revealed from the record that after being released, the
respondent/accused again indulged in an offence of similar nature and Crime
No.623/2021, registered on 04.09.2021 at Police Station Kotwali, District
Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under Section 294, 327, 506, 34 of
IPC, Crime No.381/2022, registered on 08.05.2022 at Police Station Kotwali,
District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under Section 294, 323, 506
of IPC, Crime No.439/2023, registered on 30.06.2023 at Police Station
Kotwali, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under Section 13 of
Public Gambling Act, 1976 and Crime No.459/2023, registered on
05.07.2023 at Police Station Kotwali, District Narsinghpur for the offence
punishable under Section 294, 341, 435 of IPC have been registered against
him.
4. At this juncture, it is expedient to go-through the settled legal
position. The Supreme Court in the case of Raghubir Singh v. State of
Bihar, (1986) 4 SCC 481 has held as under:-
“Generally the grounds for cancellation of bail, broadly, are,
interference or attempt to interfere with the due course ofSignature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD SHARMA
Signing time: 19-02-2026
11:28:34
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:142813 MCRC-26824-2024
administration of justice, or evasion or attempt to evade the
course of justice, or abuse of the liberty granted to him. The
due administration of justice may be interfered with by
intimidating or suborning witnesses, by interfering with
investigation, by creating or causing disappearance of
evidence etc. The course of justice may be evaded or
attempted to be evaded by leaving the country or going
underground or otherwise placing himself beyond the reach
of the sureties. He may abuse the liberty granted to him by
indulging in similar or other unlawful acts.”
5. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Myakala Dharmarajam
and others v. State of Telangana and another, (2020) 2 SCC 743, has held as
under:-
“8. In Raghubir Singh v. State of Bihar [Raghubir Singh
v. State of Bihar , (1986) 4 SCC 481 : 1986 SCC (Cri) 511]
this Court held that bail can be cancelled where (i) the accused
misuses his liberty by indulging in similar criminal activity,
(ii) interferes with the course of investigation, ( iii) attempts to
tamper with evidence or witnesses, (iv) threatens witnesses or
indulges in similar activities which would hamper smooth
investigation, (v ) there is likelihood of his fleeing to another
country, ( vi) attempts to make himself scarce by going
underground or becoming unavailable to the investigating
agency, (vii) attempts to place himself beyond the reach of his
surety, etc. The above grounds are illustrative and not
exhaustive. It must also be remembered that rejection of bail
stands on one footing but cancellation of bail is a harsh order
because it interferes with the liberty of the individual and
hence it must not be lightly resorted to.”
6. The Supreme Court in the case of P. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
and another, (2022) 15 SCC 211, has engrafted certain circumstances that too
after discussing various earlier pronouncements with regard to cancellation
of bail. Some of those circumstances where bail granted to the accused under
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD SHARMA
Signing time: 19-02-2026
11:28:34
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14281
4 MCRC-26824-2024
Section 439(1) CrPC can be cancelled are enumerated below:
(a) If he misuses his liberty by indulging in similar/other criminal
activity;
(b ) If he interferes with the course of investigation;
(c) If he attempts to tamper with the evidence;
(d ) If he attempts to influence/threaten the witnesses;
(e) If he evades or attempts to evade court proceedings;
(f) If he indulges in activities which would hamper smooth
investigation;
(g ) If he is likely to flee from the country;
(h ) If he attempts to make himself scarce by going underground and/or
becoming unavailable to the investigating agency;
(i) If he attempts to place himself beyond the reach of his surety.
(j) If any facts may emerge after the grant of bail which are considered
unconducive to a fair trial.
7. Following the respondent/accused’s involvement in a similar
offence post-release, which directly violates Condition of the order dated
14.07.2021, this Court finds sufficient ground to exercise its authority to
cancel the bail granted to the respondent/accused.
8. Accordingly, the order dated 14.07.2021 passed in
M.Cr.C.No.28360/2021 is cancelled, thereby the bail granted to the
respondent/accused Manoj @ Deepak Yadav shall stand cancelled.
9. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned trial Court for
necessary compliance.
10. This MCrC is disposed of.
(RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD SHARMA
Signing time: 19-02-2026
11:28:34
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14281
5 MCRC-26824-2024
Vin**
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD SHARMA
Signing time: 19-02-2026
11:28:34
