Gwalior- The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior today issued a landmark order in a high-profile SC/ST Act case, dealing a major setback to Anil Kumar Mishra and other co-accused. In Writ Petition No. 2/2026 (Anil Kumar Mishra vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others), a Division Bench comprising Justice G.S. Ahluwalia and Justice Ashish Shroti permitted the complainant to be impleaded as Respondent No. 5, underscoring the mandatory right of victims to a fair hearing. Citing Section 15-A(3) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Hariram Bhambhi vs. Satyanarayan & Anr. (AIR 2021 SC 5601), the bench stressed the need for accurate and timely notice to the complainant in all proceedings.

The court directed the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior, to ensure the amended writ petition copy is served to the complainant personally by 2:00 PM, or via an adult family member if unavailable. In cases of refusal or locked premises, affixation with videography is mandated. Additionally, the Investigating Officer must forward the copy via WhatsApp using the complainant's mobile number from the FIR. The state was granted one day to file an additional reply to the updated pleadings.

No decision was made on Mishra's bail plea today, keeping him in custody. The matter has been prioritized for the next hearing on January 5, at 10:30 AM, to be taken up at the top of the board regardless of listing order. The order sends a clear message: no leniency for grave crimes like insulting Baba Saheb Ambedkar or fomenting unrest, which threaten India's constitutional ethos.

Representing the petitioners were over 20 advocates, including J.P. Mishra, Pawan Pathak, and Rajiv Sharma. The state appeared through Advocate General Prashant Singh, Additional Advocate General Vivek Khedkar, and other government counsel via video conferencing.

Social activists have hailed the verdict as a victory for constitutional safeguards and justice for SC/ST communities, amid growing concerns over hate crimes in the region.

The Controversy Unfolded:

In Gwalior, Advocate Anil Kumar Mishra and his associates face serious charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly burning a photo of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar using derogatory and hate-filled language, disrupting social harmony, and inciting communal riots.

The case stems from an FIR highlighting violations of constitutional values and social cohesion. Mishra filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR or bail, framing the actions as 'freedom of expression.' However, the High Court has firmly rejected this narrative, emphasizing zero tolerance for such offenses that poison societal fabric and undermine the Constitution. This ruling serves as a landmark rebuke to forces attempting to cloak constitutional insults under the guise of free speech, reinforcing protections for marginalized communities amid rising social tensions.