Condition Requiring Govt Servant To Stand Surety Effectively Denies Bail: MP High Court Grants Relief To Two Detained Ahead Of NEET Protests
The Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition seeking release of two members of the National Educated Youth Union who were arrested when they filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner of Police for organising a protest in support of students protesting against NEET Paper Leak at Jantar Mantar. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 297]The division bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition seeking release of two members of the National Educated Youth Union who were arrested when they filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner of Police for organising a protest in support of students protesting against NEET Paper Leak at Jantar Mantar. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 297]
The division bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Alok Awasthi noted that the bail condition imposed by the Police, to furnish a bail bond by a government servant, was "one that the detenue will likely be unable to meet".
"A perusal of the order indicates that although the detenues are directed to be released upon providing a bail bond as prescribed, this Court believes that the requirement in the said order for a government servant to furnish the bond is one that the detenue will likely be unable to meet. Any government servant concerned about his/her job would be unlikely to provide bail bonds for the detenues. Therefore, such condition imposed upon the detenues amounts to a denial of bail".
The plea sought release of two members of the National Educated Youth Union, who were detained at the instance of the Assistant Commissioner of Police for their allegedly peaceful protest, which they intended to carry out on July 23, 2026, to support the students protesting at Jantar Mantar against the NEET Paper Leak.
The petitioners claimed that they had made a representation to the Assistant Commissioner of Police informing that they wanted to organise a procession in support of the said student protesters. However, instead of granting permission, the members were allegedly detained by the police.
The counsel appearing for the State informed the court that the members were detained under Section 170 BNSS, which allows the police to make a preventive arrest, which the conditions mentioned in the order by the Assistant Commissioner of Police.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted the conditions imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, claiming that the said conditions cannot be fulfilled by the detenues, as they require a government servant to furnish a bail bond.
The counsel for the State argued that said bail conditions were imposed keeping in consideration the previous conduct of the detenues in 2024, wherein they tried to disturb the peace by violent protest.
The court noted the bail conditions imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police were unlikely to be fulfilled by the detenue, as any government servant concerned about their job would be unlikely to provide bail bonds for the detenue.
Emphasising that onerous bail conditions are imposed in exceptional circumstances and cannot be imposed in a matter of course, the bench referred to the case of Yashik Jindal v Union of India (2023).
Therefore, the bench allowed the habeas corpus petition with direction that the detenues be released upon furnishing personal bond of ₹50,000 each with one solvent surety each.
Case Title: Ranjeet Jat v State of Madhya Pradesh, WP-29660-2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 297
For Petitioner: Advocate Jayesh Gurnani
For State: Advocate Pradyumna Kibe