IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI

th

ON THE 12 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 734 of 2026 THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Versus ANKIT RICHHARIYA Appearance:

Shri Yash Soni - Dy. Advocate General for appellant/State.

None for respondent.

WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1100 of 2025 VICTIM-A Versus ANKIT RICHARYIA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Anurag Prajapati - Advocate for appellant/victim.

None for respondent No.1.

Shri Yash Soni - Dy. Advocate General for respondent No.2/State.

JUDGMENT Per: Justice Rajendra Kumar Vani Heard on I.A. No.1578/2026, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing Cr.A. No.734/2026.

Same is allowed for the reasons mentioned therein and delay of 291 days in filing Cr.A. No.734/2026 is condoned.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the appeals are heard finally.

Criminal Appeal No.734/2026 has been filed by the State of M.P.

under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. r/w Section 419 of BNSS, 2023 and Criminal Appeal No.1100/2025 under Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the victim assailing the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.12.2024 passed in S.T. No.12/2023 (State of M.P. vs Ankit Richariya) by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Jatara, Tikamgarh (M.P.) whereby respondent - Ankit Richariya (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') has been acquitted of the offence under Sections 450, 376, 323, 506-II of IPC.

2. In Criminal Appeal No.734/2026, an application (I.A. No.1576 of 2026) has been filed seeking grant of leave to appeal under section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973/419(3) of BNSS, 2023.

3. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that on 30.12.2022, the prosecutrix filed a report at the Jatara police station stating that on 29.12.2022 at around 6:00 p.m., her husband had gone to water the crops, while her three children had gone to her mother-in-law's place for study, and she was alone at home. At 8:30 p.m., when after cooking food for dinner she was sitting on a cot inside her house, the accused- Ankit Richariya, whom she knew, entered her room, threw her on the cot, slapped her on both cheeks, and then raped her. When the prosecutrix screamed, the accused committed marpeet with kicks and fists, injuring her right calf and thigh. The accused threatened to kill her if she told anyone and jumped over the wall and fled. When the prosecutrix's husband returned home, she gave him complete information and then reported the incident on 30.12.2022, on the basis of which a case was registered against the accused at Crime No. 337/2022 and the matter was taken up for investigation.

4 . After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted in the competent court, which on its turn committed the case to the court of sessions and from where it was received by the Trial Court for trial.

5. The learned Trial Judge on the basis of the averments made against the accused in the charge sheet framed charges punishable under Sections 450, 376, 323 and 506 Part-II of IPC. The accused denied having committed the crime. The defence of the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. is that at the time of the incident he had gone to his wife's house in Panna and he also took the defence that a civil case was pending between him and the prosecutrix, due to which there was a grudge. The DNA sampling is dehors the procedure prescribed. The DNA report mentions another woman Mohini Khangar. Accused has examined Dinesh Richhariya (DW-1) in his defence.

6. The prosecution, in order to bring home the charges examined as many as 11 witnesses, namely, husband of the prosecutrix (PW-1), prosecutrix (PW-2), Brijbhushan Yadav (PW-3), mother-in-law of the prosecutrix (PW- 4), Dr. Archna Rajput (PW-5), father-in-law of the prosecutrix (PW-6), Neetu Khatik (PW-7), Dr. Ritika Jain (PW-8), Upkar Raipuriya (PW-9), J.N.Bhagat (PW-10) and Himanshu Bhindiya (PW-11) and placed