Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nitish Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10052
1 MCRC-14739-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 16th OF APRIL, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14739 of 2025
NITISH KUMAR S/O KAILASH YADAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Applicant by Shri Akhilesh Sharma - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Hemant Sharma -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
ORDER
This repeat (third) bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) has
been filed by applicant - Nitish Kumar S/o Kailash Yadav for grant of
regular bail, who has been arrested on 10.03.2023 in connection with Crime
No.95 of 2023 registered at Police Station Sagour, District Dhar (M.P.) for
commission of offences under Sections 376-D, 506 (2) and 450 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860. His first application was dismissed as withdrawn vide
order dated 06.10.2023 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.39404 of
2023; and second application of the applicant has also been dismissed vide
order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.11654 of
2024 as withdrawn with a direction to the learned trial Court to make all
endeavor to examine the prosecutrix and other material witnesses as early as
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10052
2 MCRC-14739-2025
possible.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
falsely been implicated in the case. He is suffering incarceration since
10.03.2023. Eleven witnesses have been examined so far and only four or
five prosecution witnesses are remaining, but they belong to Bihar State,
therefore, in recording of their statement will take time. Learned counsel has
invited attention of this Court towards statement of prosecutrix recorded
before the trial Court requiring out various paragraphs for making his case
that there are serious discrepancies, contradictions and omissions in the
statement. He further invites attention of this Court towards statement of
doctor who examined the victim, specifically emphasizing the fact that no
marks of resistance has been found on the body of the victim. He further
submits that DNA of co-accused has matched, but DNA Report as far as this
applicant is concerned, is negative. On these contentions, learned counsel
for the applicant prays for grant of bail.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State has
vehemently opposed the prayer on the ground that this is a case of gang rape
wherein the victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement before
the Court. Discrepancies are to be appreciated by the learned trial Court at
the time of final hearing and writing judgment. Looking to the heinousness
of offence, learned counsel for the respondent - State has opposed the prayer
and prays for dismissal of the bail application.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
5. In the aforesaid factual backdrop and looking to the nature of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10052
3 MCRC-14739-2025
offence and the evidence available on record, this Court is not inclined to
grant benefit of bail to the applicant.
6. Accordingly, this repeat bail application is dismissed.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
