The Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to Congress worker Mahendra Jainminda in a case involving allegations of a derogatory Facebook comment made against Union Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia. The High Court noted that the offences alleged were not punishable with a mandatory sentence.

The applicant approached the High Court apprehending his arrest in connection with a case registered under Sections 353(2), 352, 356(2) of BNS.

The Single Bench of Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke held, “Taking into account that the offences alleged under Sections 352, 353(2), and 356(2) of the BNS, 2023 are not punishable with mandatory sentence and the nature of accusation, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court intends to allow this application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023.”

Advocate Upendra Sharma represented the Applicant while Public Prosecutor Samar Ghuraiya represented the respondent/State.

Factual Background

The complainant, Pradeep Pal, submitted a written report at the Police Station alleging that he received a screenshot from his friend Bablu Yadav on WhatsApp showing a derogatory post from the Facebook ID of Mahendra Jainminda against a Member of Parliament and Union Minister, which caused anger among his supporters. Along with his report, the complainant submitted the screenshot, the profile of Mahendra Jainminda, and a pen drive containing a screen recording of the post. On this basis, the criminal case came to be registered.

Reasoning

The Bench took note of the nature of the accusation and the fact that the offences alleged were not punishable with a mandatory sentence. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Bench allowed the application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023.

The Bench further ordered that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency.

The Bench also asked the applicant to cooperate in the investigation/ trial and further prohibited him from indulging in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer. The applicant has also been asked not to leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer.

Cause Title: Mahendra Jain v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-GWL:20992)

Click here to read/download Order


Madhya Pradesh High CourtJustice Milind Ramesh Phadke

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.