Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhagwan Singh Chouhan vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 27 October, 2025
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
Bench: Subodh Abhyankar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488
1
MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
ON THE 27th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44424 of 2025
VIVEK GUPTA
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Appearance:
Shri Vivek Singh- Senior Advocate with Shri Shivendra Singh
Rawat- Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi- Advocate for the respondent.
WITH
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 45490 of 2025
BHAGWAN SINGH CHOUHAN
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Appearance:
Shri Vivek Singh- Senior Advocate with Shri Shivendra Singh Rawat-
Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi- Advocate for the respondent.
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 45822 of 2025
GLADWIN EDWARD CARR
Versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Appearance:
Shri S.K. Vyas- Senior Advocate with Shri L.S. Chandiramani- Advocate for the applicant.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA
Signing time: 27-11-2025
18:22:30
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488
2
MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi- Advocate for the respondent.
ORDER
1] They are heard. Perused the challan papers.
2] This order shall govern the disposal of all the three applications, as they
have arisen out of same Crime No. R.C.08(S)/2014/CBI/SC-IIIND registered at Police Station CBI, New Delhi.
3] MCRC Nos.44424/2025 and 45490/2025, are the first anticipatory bail applications filed by the applicants Vivek Gupta and Bhagwan Singh Chouhan respectively, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/438 of Cr.P.C. as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.R.C.08(S)/2014/CBI/SC-III-ND registered at Police Station CBI, New Delhi for offence punishable under Sections 307, 353, 332, 302/120-b, 193, 119 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
4] MCRC No.45822/2025 is the first bail application filed by the applicant Gladwin Edward Carr under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/439 of Cr.P.C. as he is implicated in connection with Crime No.R.C.08(S)/2014/CBI/SC-III-ND registered at Police Station CBI, New Delhi for offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302, 119, 193 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant is in custody since 01.04.2025. 5] It is alleged that the applicant and the other co-accused persons, mostly police personnel, were involved in staging an encounter of one Bansilal Gurjar, a rank offender, on 08.02.2009, however, it was subsequently found that Bansilal Gurjar was still alive and some other person, shown to be Bansilal Gurjar was encountered in his place. At the relevant time, i.e., on 08.02.2009, when the Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 3 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected incident took place, the applicant Vivek Gupta was posted as Sub Inspector, Neemuch and Bhagwan Singh Chauhan was posted as then Head Constable, Manasa and applicant Gladwin Edward Carr was posted as SHO, P.S. Rampura. It is alleged that the applicants and the other accused persons conspired together to shield one Bansilal Gurjar by staging his encounter on 08.02.2009, however, subsequently, in the year 2014, it was found that Bansilal Gurjar is still alive, and the person who died in the encounter was someone else, an unknown person. 6] The case of the prosecution is that the after the aforesaid encounter took place in the year 2009, the matter was closed, as the family members of the deceased Bansilal Gurjar had also identified the dead body, however, in the year 2011, an offence was registered at Police Station Neemuch Cantt. at Crime No.154/2011, wherein, one Ratanlal was arrested, who, for the first time disclosed that Bansilal Gurjar is still alive, and thus, on 20.11.2012, Bansilal Gurjar was also arrested, and an FIR was lodged against him at Crime No.63/2011 under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 474 of IPC on 23.11.2012.
7] Subsequently, a Writ Petition (PIL) No.809/2014 (Goverdhan Vs. The Chief Secretary of Madhya Pradesh Secretariat, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal), was filed for calling of relevant record of the case, with all the whereabouts of the innocent person who was killed in the said so-called encounter, and an enquiry by CBI or NIA was also sought, and W.P. (PIL) No.10525/2013 (Moolchand Khichi Vs. Secretary (Home), State of Madhya Pradesh through, Ministry of Home Bhopal) was also filed seeking almost the identical reliefs. In both these cases, the Division Bench of this Court directed the CBI to investigate all the aspects of the matter of killing of an innocent person, whose encounter was Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 4 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected shown as that of Bansilal Gurjar, and also the role of the Police officers in the same.
8] Thus, on 08.12.2014, an FIR was registered by the CBI at Crime No.R.C.08(S)/2014/CBI/SC-III-ND at Police Station CBI, New Delhi for offence punishable under Sections 307, 353, 332, 302/120-B, 193, 119 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Pursuant to which, statements of various witnesses were also recorded, including Dr. Surendra Patel who conducted the initial medical examination of the present applicants Vivek Gupta and Inspector G.E. Carr on 08.02.2009, as both of them had allegedly suffered gunshot injuries at the hands of the person who was projected as Bansilal Gurjar. In the MLC, the doctor had clearly stated that neither of them had sustained any gunshot injuries.
9] Shri Vivek Singh, learned senior counsel for the applicants Vivek Gupta and Bhagwan Singh Chauhan has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case, as they have no role to play in the story as narrated by the prosecution. It is submitted that the case of the present applicants stands on similar footing with co-accused Anil Patidar and Mukhtar Rashid Qureshi, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. Nos.24925/2025 and M.Cr.C. Nos.31423/2025, vide order order dated 15.09.2025. In the application of Bhagwan Singh Chauhan it is mentioned that he has already retired as Head Constable and is 72 years old. 10] Counsel has also submitted that whatever the applicants did at that time, is already documented, and the death of Bansilal Gurjar was also affirmed by all his family members. In such circumstances, at this juncture, if they have resiled from their earlier statement, it cannot be said that the applicants were responsible Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 5 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected for the alleged encounter, especially when none has taken the name of the applicants.
11] Shri S.K.Vyas learned senior counsel for the applicant G.E. Carr has submitted that the applicant had no role to play as alleged by the prosecution, as the applicant had only registered the FIR of the incident, and thereafter, the applicant did not investigate the matter, and the scene of crime was inspected by the FSL team of Ratlam District, and in the FSL report, the possibility of occurrence of incident has been justified and no adverse comment was made. 12] On the other hand, Shri Manoj Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the CBI, has vehemently opposed the prayer, and it is submitted that looking to the fact that an innocent person has been murdered in the name of encounter, it is not a case where anticipatory bail can be granted. Shri Dwivedi has also submitted that the postmortem report of the deceased was also sent to the AIIMS for further verification, and it has been found that the injury No.5 of the post mortem report is suggestive of repeated localized crush injury by blunt force, causing disfiguration, which is not consistent with road traffic accident pattern of injury. It is also submitted that false evidence was created to show that the applicants G.E. Carr and Vivek Gupta were also hit by bullets fired by the so- called Bansilal Gurjar.
13] Counsel has also submitted that the report of Dr. S. Patel has also revealed that the injuries on the body of applicants G.E. Carr and Vivek Gupta, were not caused by gunshot, instead these injuries were caused by a blunt object. It is also submitted that Balu, one of the witnesses to the body identification panchnama, has stated that during the panchnama proceedings, he had also informed that he knew Bansilal Gurjar, and that the dead body was not that of Bansilal Gurjar, but Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 6 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected the accused Bhagwan Singh Chauhan slapped him and forced him to state that the dead body was of Bansilal Gurjar.
14] It is also submitted that the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI & EOW cases, Indore after perusing the record, has already issued an arrest warrant against the applicants Vivek Gupta and Bhagwan Singh Chauhan on 11.04.2025, and since then, the applicants are absconding and were not found, either at the available addresses, or in the office. It is also submitted that applicant Vivek Gupta along with applicant G.E. Carr killed an innocent man in the intervening night of 07/08.02.2009 by staging it as an encounter of Bansilal Gurjar.
15] Heard. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case- diary, as also the documents filed by the applicants on record, this Court finds that so far as the applicant Bhagwan Singh Chouhan is concerned, his case is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in the case of Anil Patidar and Mukhtar Rashid Qureshi, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. Nos.24925/2025 and 31423/2025 respectively, vide order dated 15.09.2025, because against Bhagwan Singh Chouhan, it is alleged that he had threatened a witness viz., Balu, who was a witnesses to body identification (शव पंचनामा) in the year 2009 to identify the dead body as Bansilal Gurjar, whereas this allegation was made by him in the year 2018 before the JMFC Neemuch and thus, this Court finds that he is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.
16] Accordingly, M.Cr.C. No.45490/2025 is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Bhagwan Singh Chouhan shall be released on bail, upon his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 7 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected Twenty Five Thousand only) and furnishing a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer). The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
17] However, so far as the applicants Vivek Gupta and Gladwin Edward Carr are concerned, it is found that both of them had disclosed in the year 2009 that they had suffered gunshot injuries in the incident, in which it was shown that Bansilal Gurjar has died in an encounter, and even at that time, in their MLC, Dr. Surendra Patel had opined that both of these persons had suffered injuries by hard and blunt object, and nowhere it is mentioned that both had also suffered gunshot injuries despite the fact that in its forwarding letter, the Police had also mentioned that both the witnesses had suffered gunshot injuries. Whereas, in the case of Anil Patidar (Supra), this court has also observed as under:-
"16] After Bansilal Gurjar was arrested, he also informed that the dead body of the person who was identified as himself was obtained from some hospital at Udaipur, Rajasthan with the help of local Police Officers and one Mangal Patwa, a resident of Kukreshwar and also with the help of a medical shop owner Rajendra Patidar, although, Rajendra Patidar has denied the allegations made by Bansilal Gurjar."
18] In such circumstances, the complicity of the applicants in the offence cannot be ruled out. However, taking into account the fact that the applicant G.E. Carr is already lodged in jail, whereas, the applicant Vivek Gupta is seeking anticipatory bail, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the applicant Vivek Gupta would be necessary, and he is also Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34488 8 MCRC No.44424-2025 & connected directed to surrender within two weeks' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
19] So far as the applicant G.E. Carr is concerned, taking into account the extent of his involvement, he shall be at liberty to renew his prayer after the charges are framed by the Trial Court.
20] Accordingly, with the aforesaid directions and liberty M.Cr.C. No.45490/2025 (Bhagwan Singh Chouhan Vs. CBI) stands allowed, and M.Cr.C. Nos.44424/2025(Vivek Gupta Vs. CBI) and 45822/2025(Gladwin Edward Carr Vs. CBI) are dismissed.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE Bahar Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 27-11-2025 18:22:30