IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY

th

ON THE 10 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 59185 of 2025 RAJESH KOL @ GORELAL KOL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Arunodaya Singh - Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Vineet Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

ORDER This is the first application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the applicant for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.194 of 2025 registered at Police Station- Shahpur, District-Mauganj (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The applicant is in custody since 16.08.2025.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 04.07.2025, the complainant, Ramu Kol, who is the father of the prosecutrix, lodged a missing person report at Police Station Shahpur, District Rewa (M.P.). During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix was recovered and it was revealed that the applicant had taken the prosecutrix along with him. Thereafter, it is alleged that the prosecutrix and the applicant stayed at Indore for some time, during which period the applicant violated the privacy of the prosecutrix.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the date of birth of the prosecutrix is doubtful, inasmuch as two different dates of birth have been introduced. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is above the age of 18 years and was a consenting party, as is also evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, wherein she stated that she stayed with the applicant at Indore for about 10–15 days and that both of them were working in a biscuit factory. It is further submitted that during the course of trial, the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case and has not made any allegation against the applicant with respect to the alleged offence. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the bail application on the ground that, as per the prosecution case, the prosecutrix was below the age of 18 years and that the DNA report is positive.

4. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case particularly, the conduct of the prosecutrix and her statement recorded before the trial Court, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.

5. It is directed that the applicant namely Rajesh Kol @ Gorelal Kol be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned for his appearance before it on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard. On being released on bail, the applicant shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 480(3) of BNSS.

6. Accordingly, this MCRC stands disposed of.

(RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)

JUDGE julie