IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 16 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44664 of 2025 SACHIN Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Durgesh Patidar - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Tarun Pagare GA for the State.

ORDER

1. Learned counsel for the State informs that notice has been served upon the victim.

2. This first application has been filed by the applicant under Section

483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 381 of 2025 registered at Police Station - Station Road, Ratlam, District - Ratlam (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 5(L)/6, 5(n)/6 of POCSO Act, 2012. Applicant is in judicial custody since 13/05/2025.

3. Heard the arguments.

4. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and the relevant material on record.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence under pressure of family members of the victim. It is a case of romantic relationship between youngsters. Learned counsel further referring to the evidence of victim(PW1), her father (PW2) and her mother (PW3) recorded before the trial Court, contends that the victim and her parents have exonerated the applicant of the alleged offence, further, they have stated that the victim was aged more than 19 years at the time of alleged offence. The determination of age during investigation is doubtful in view of the evidence of victim and her parents. There is no likelihood of tampering with the remaining evidence by the applicant for the reason that the material prosecution witnesses have been examined. Jail incarceration of the applicant is causing hardship to the young applicant.

Applicant is ready to cooperate in trial.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going through the case diary, he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant.

7. According to the material available on case diary, applicant aged around 21 years kidnapped the minor victim aged around 17 years and had penetrative sexual relations with her. However, prima facie the element of enticement or compulsion by the applicant is missing in her statements. The material prosecution witnesses have been examined. The victim PW1 and her parents PW2 and PW3, respectively, did not support the prosecution and exonerate the applicant of the alleged offence in their evidence before the trial Court. The veracity of prosecution will be determined after evidence in the trial.

8. As informed, the applicant is aged around 21 years and is a labourer by profession. He survives on occasional labour work. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence of any criminal antecedent, considering the socio-economic status of the applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with remaining evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However, the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.

9. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the merits, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is allowed.

10. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant - Sachin shall be released on bail in connection with the Crime as mentioned in first paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the following conditions : (For convenience of