IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR

th

ON THE 17 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 53498 of 2025 KUNDAN Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Kaushal Sisodiya - Advocate for the applicant.

Shri K K Tiwari - G.A. for the State.

Shri Abdul Sameer Khan - Advocate for the respondent [OBJ].

ORDER

1. They are heard. Perused the case diary/challan papers.

2. This is the applicant's first application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973), as he / she is implicated in connection with Crime No.657/2025 registered at Police Station Barwani, District Barwani (MP) for offence punishable under Section Section 137(2), 87, 64(1), 64(2)(m), 127(4) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. The applicant is lodged in jail since 19/10/2025.

3. Allegation against the applicant is of abduction and rape.

4. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case dispute the fact that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and on earlier occasion also, a similar report of rape was lodged against the applicant at Crime No.177/2025 at the instance of the family members of the prosecutrix, in which, this Court in M.Cr.C. No.24040/2025 had granted bail to the applicant on 13/08/2025 also taking into account the fact that the applicant and the prosecutrix resided together as husband and wife. Counsel has submitted that subsequently, after the prosecutrix was recovered, she again eloped with the applicant, which is also apparent from her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C./183 of BNSS, and she resided with the applicant for around one and half months, and the age of the prosecutrix is also in dispute. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed, applicant is in jail since 19/10/2025 and the final conclusion of trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Hence, it is submitted that the bail application be allowed and applicant be released on bail.

5. Counsel for the respondent / State as also the objector, on the other hand have opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out as the prosecutrix is minor.

6. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary as also the earlier order passed by this Court, this Court finds force in the submissions as advanced by the counsel for the applicant, and further taking note of the fact that the age of the prosecutrix is in dispute, the applicant is lodged in jail since 19/10/2025, no further recovery of discovery is to be made from the applicant and final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time, in the considered opinion of this Court, the applicant's application deserves to be allowed.

7. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

8. M.Cr.C. stands allowed.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)

JUDGE krjoshi