1
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 236 OF 2023
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s). 8711/2022)
NAVEEN KAMRA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
By the impugned order the High Court has dismissed the 5 th repeat application, filed by the appellant, under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned counsel for the respondent.
On the question as to whether the victim has been examined, the learned counsel for the State submits that the six witnesses have indeed been examined and the victim has also been examined. The appellant has been in custody since 10.02.2021.
Vide order dated 18.11.2022 this court has inter alia passed the following order: ��.Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to file an
affidavit indicating therein the details of movable
and immovable properties owned by him. He is

2
further directed not to alienate or cause
encumbrance on such properties.�
Pursuant to the above order, an affidavit has been filed
in the matter wherein interalia it has been indicated as
follows:
�5. That is submitted that the Petitioner does
not have any movable or immovable property in
his name. However, there is a house located at
Gwalior of 1500 Sq. feet with a current market
value of rupees 1.5 crore approximately shop
located at Nill with current market value of
Nill and incomplete house belonging to the
father of the Petitioner located at Gwalior with
a current market value of rupees 8 crore
approximately. The father of the Petitioner
would furnished the security in the Hon�ble
Court.�
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we
are of the view that the appellant has made out a case for
being enlarged on bail subject to the conditions to be
imposed by the trial court.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned
order is set aside.
We direct that the appellant shall be released on
bail subject to the conditions as may be imposed by the
trial court unless his custody is warranted in any other
case.
We also direct that while imposing condition(s), the
trial court will also bear in mind the readiness which has
been expressed by the learned counsel for the appellant to

3
the effect that the father of the appellant is willing to
offer the property, details of which has been indicated in
paragraph 5 of the affidavit which has been extracted above,
as security.
J.
[K. M. JOSEPH]
J.
[B. V. NAGARATHNA]
New Delhi
30th January, 2023

4
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8711/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-07-2022
in MCRC No. 37407/2022 passed by the High Court of M.P.at Gwalior)
NAVEEN KAMRA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)
IA No. 8186/2023 – APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION
IA No. 137914/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT
IA No. 137915/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Date : 30-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
For Appellant(s)
Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, AOR
Ms. Eliza Bar, Adv.
Mr. Neiketou Rio, Adv.
Mr. Siddhant Saroha, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Bathija, Adv.
Ms. Ineka Tewari, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
The appellant shall be released on bail subject to the
conditions as may be imposed by the trial court unless his
custody is warranted in any other case.
Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
(NEELAM GULATI) (RENU KAPOOR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)