Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Vinod Bhardwaj
2022 Latest Caselaw 6710 MP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6710 MP
Judgement Date : 5 May, 2022

Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Vinod Bhardwaj on 5 May, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
                                                        1
                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                                SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                                           &
                                          SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                                 ON THE 5th OF MAY, 2022

                                     MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 16271 of 2021

                              Between:-
                              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. ITS P.S.
                              ADEGAON SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....PETITIONER
                              (BY SHRI S.K.KASHYAP, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )

                              AND

                              VINOD BHARDWAJ S/O PREMLAL BHARDWAJ ,
                              AGED     ABOUT    42    YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                              AGRICULTURE `VILLAGE PONDI P.S. ADEGAVON
                              DISTT. SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS


                            This application coming on for hearing this day, JUSTICE DWARKA
                      DHISH BANSAL passed the following:
                                                         ORDER

Heard on the application seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(III) o f Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 19.01.2021 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Seoni in S.C. No.06/2020 acquitting the respondent from the charges under Sections 363, 342, 366, 376(2)(i)(j), 376(2)(l) of IPC and Section 3, 4, 5(k), 5(m), 5(l) r/w sec. 6 of POCSO Act and Section 92(D) of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

Shri S.K. Kashyap, learned Government Advocate submits that as per the prosecution story on 30.03.2019 mother of prosecutrix lodged complaint at police station Adegaon to the effect that on 29.03.2016 at about 12:30 to 01:00 pm her daughter (Prosecutrix) was not at home, she searched her in

Signature SAN Not neighbourhood but could not find her anywhere. She also went to the house of Verified

Digitally signed by respondent-Vinod, who lives in front of her house, his wife and son went to SWETA SAHU Date: 2022.05.07 17:24:53 IST

Chhapara and he was alone in the house, his door was locked, therefore, the complainant came back. After 15 to 20 minutes she saw her daughter/prosecutrix coming out of Vinod's house. Prosecutrix is physically disabled, is not able to speak but understands her mother's sign. On being

asked about any wrongful act done by respondent, she replied yes and upon seeing there was swelling and redness in her genitals.

Learned Government Advocate submits that despite recording findings about the age in Para 21 of its judgment to the effect that the prosecutrix was below the age of 18 years and further the DNA report as well as the Doctor supports the prosecution version, learned court below erred in acquitting the respondent from the charges even in presence of presumption available under Section 29 and 30 of POCSO Act and prays for grant of leave.

We have heard the learned Government Advocate at length and perused the record.

Prima facie, we find substance in the argument of learned counsel for the State.

Considering the aforesaid, we deem it proper to grant leave. We order accordingly.

The matter be converted into Criminal Appeal.

Registry shall issue bailable warrant in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) against the respondent for securing his presence before the Registry on a date to be fixed by the Registry.

Accordingly, this M.Cr.C. is disposed of.

     (SUJOY PAUL)                                     (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
        JUDGE                                                JUDGE
ss
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter