IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 15 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 615 of 2026

RAKESH

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Ms. Naina Solanki, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Bhagyashree Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

Shri Akshat Nimje, Advocate for the respondent [COMP].

ORDER committed by the applicant. It is a case of romantic relationship between teenagers. Learned counsel further referring to the statement of the victim recorded under sections 183 of the BNSS, 2023, contends that the victim had left her parental home at her own and went with the applicant. She did not allege any inducement, instigation, compulsion or force against the applicant. The determination of age of the victim during investigation is doubtful. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. Applicant has clean past, with family roots, property and employment. There is no history of evading process of law. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the young applicant and his family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

Learned counsel for the State submits that victim has duly been informed

about filing of the bail application.

This first application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 of

BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.326/2025, registered at Police Station - Shivgarh, District - Ratlam(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 142, 87, 64(2)(n), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 5(L)/6 of

POCSO Act. Applicant is in judicial custody since 10.11.2025.

Heard the arguments.

Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary

and the relevant material on record.

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. No offence, as alleged, is

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail 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. The applicant is aged 18 years and is a labourer by profession.

Learned counsel for the respondent /objector submits that the parents of the victim plead "no objection" to grant of bail to the applicant.

According to the material available on case diary, the applicant, aged around

18 years, kidnapped the minor victim aged around 17 years and 09 month and subjected her to penetrative sexual assault. Prima-facie, the element of inducement, enticement, compulsion or force to leave her parental home is missing in the statement of victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, 2023. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. The trial would take time to conclude. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of prosecution and age of victim will be determined after evidence in the trial.

As informed, applicant is still dependent on the family and 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 recidivism or tampering with evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the young applicant. However, the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.

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 young applicant on bail. Thus, the application is allowed.

Accordingly, it is directed that ap