Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhupendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 January, 2026
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
Bench: Subodh Abhyankar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3860
1 MCRC-955-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
ON THE 29th OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 955 of 2026
BHUPENDRA SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Vibhor Khandelwal - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Viraj Godha -GA appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].
ORDER
1] They are heard. Perused the case-diary.
2] This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.197/2025 registered at Police Station Crime Branch, District Indore for the offence punishable under Sections 111 (4), 3(5), 318(4), 336 (3), 338 and 340 (2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3] The allegation against the applicant is of total fraud of Rs.54,00,000/- along with other co-accused persons, out of which Rs.31,16,520/- is attributed to the applicant. It is also alleged that the applicant and the other two co-accused persons obtained the loan from Bajaj Finance on the basis of impersonation as medical professional by fraudulently using the credentials of actual doctors.
4] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, as he has also suffered from a stroke of paralysis on as many as two times. The documents regarding which are also filed on record, and the applicant is also ready to cooperate with the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO SARKAR Signing time: 2/7/2026 11:00:14 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3860 2 MCRC-955-2026 investigation.
5] Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the case involves documentary evidence only, and thus the applicant's custodial interrogation in such circumstances,would not be necessary as he is also ready to cooperate in the investigation.
6] Counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer. 7] Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary it is found that serious allegation of fraud by impersonation has been made against the applicant and co-accused persons,viz, Hariom Bansal and Pradeep Neeranjan against whom similar fraud to the tune of Rs.12,79,404/- and Rs.10,44,852/- respectively have also been made, and all the three of them were working together only, in such circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the applicant appears to be necessary and thus, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
8] So far as the medical condition of the applicant is concerned, admittedly, while committing the aforesaid fraud, the aforesaid disability has not come in his way; thus, the aforesaid ground is also of no avail to him, and it is also found that the applicant is the main conspirator. 9] Accordingly, the MCRC stands dismissed.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE das Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA PARTHO SARKAR Signing time: 2/7/2026 11:00:14 AM