IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR st ON THE 21 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 1434 of 2026 ANKIT KUMAR MEHTAR Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Amit Raval, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri Sunit Kapoor, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

Ms. Kavita Sharma, Advocate for the respondent [OBJ].

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.245/2025 registered at Police Station - Boda, District Rajgarh(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2), 65(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4, 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. Applicant is in judicial custody since 29.08.2025.

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 had left her parental home at her own and went to various places. She met Abhishek Malvi and went with Abhishek to other places. Therefore, there is no allegation of enticing and kidnapping the victim from her parental home against the applicant. As alleged, no evidence exists to substantiate that the applicant took the victim to the hotel and stayed there. Learned counsel further referring to the DNA Examination Report, submits that the DNA report does not substantiate allegation of penetrative sexual assault by the applicant. Rather, it exonerates the applicant. 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. Learned counsel appearing for the objector submits that the medico-

legal report suggests penetrative sexual relations with the victim, who is aged around 14 years. The applicant may not be extended benefit of bail as he may influence the witness.

8. Considered.

9. As per the accusation on record, applicant - Ankit Kumar Mehtar met victim at Ujjain Railway Station on 20.08.2025. He took the victim to house of his sister. Thereafter, he took the victim to a hotel and committed multiple penetrative sexual assault with the victim. On 27.08.2025, the victim was intercepted by Police. The applicant was arrested on 29.08.2025 for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2), 65(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4, 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. He is in custody ever since. The applicant was subjected to DNA Examination. However, the DNA Examination Report dated 30.09.2025 does substantiate the allegation of penetrative sexual assault by the applicant. 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 complicity of the applicant will be determined after evidence i