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

nd

ON THE 22 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2069 of 2026 RAJU @ RAJESH Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Tarun Kushwah, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Usha Chauhan, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

ORDER Learned counsel for the State submits that victim has duly been informed about filing of the bail application.

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.04/2025 registered at Police Station - Sarvan, District Ratlam(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4, 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. Applicant is in judicial custody since 07.01.2025.

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. Learned counsel referring to the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 submits that the victim was engaged with Kalu Dodiyar. She had liking for the applicant, therefore, she called the applicant and insisted to take her. She went with the applicant to Bhopal and Guna. The victim did not allege any enticement, force, compulsion and inducement against the applicant. The determination of age of the victim during investigation is doubtful. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. The applicant has clean past, with family roots. There is no history of evading process of law. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant for the reason that he is labourer by profession and is not capable to influence the witnesses. The trial would take time to conclude. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the young applicant and his family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

6. 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 22 years and is a labourer by profession.

7. As per the accusation on record, applicant - Raju @ Rajesh kidnapped the minor victim aged around 15 years 03 months and subjected to penetrative sexual assault. The Police Station -Sarvan, District Ratlam (M.P.) registered FIR for offence punishable under Sections 1137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4, 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. Applicant was apprehended on 07/01/2025. He is in custody ever since. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. The trial is under way. Prima-facie the allegation of enticement, inducement and compulsion is missing in the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of prosecution, complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence as also age of victim will be determined after evidence in the trial.

8. As informed, the applicant is still dependent on his family and survives on occasional labouer 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.

9. Considering the rival contentions and overall cir