Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nitin Navik vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 August, 2025
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
1 WP-30135-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 22nd OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 30135 of 2025
NITIN NAVIK
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Brijesh Kumar Choubey - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Girish Kekre - G.A. for the State.
ORDER
In the present case, the petitioner has been prosecuted as well as
confronted with the departmental enquiry simultaneously on identical set
of allegations. The prosecution of criminal case has been lodged against
the petitioner under Section 376 (2)(N), 323 of the Indian Penal Code
wherein the charges were framed way back on 19.1.2024 and as per the
online status of the case, the matter is now fixed for prosecution
evidence on 25.9.2025.
2. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that when the
First Information Report as well as charge-sheet issued in the
departmental enquiry are placed at juxtaposition, it would reveal that the
enquiry has been initiated on account of registration of offence under
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
2 WP-30135-2025
Section 376(2)(N) of the Indian Panel Code vide Crime No. 226 of 2023.
It is further contended that this eventuality has already been taken note
of by the Apex Court in M/s Stanzen Toyotetsu India P. Ltd. Vs. Girish
V. & others - 2014 (3) SCC 636 and therefore, in the light of the
aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, the departmental enquiry be kept
in abeyance till the decision of prosecution.
3 . The counsel for the State submits that there is no bar in
continuing with the prosecution as well as departmental proceedings
simultaneously and in support of the aforesaid contention, the counsel
has placed reliance on the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by this Court
in W.P. No. 12681 of 2022 ( Deshraj Singh Parihar Vs. State of M.P. &
others) to submit that there is no embargo in continuing departmental
enquiry as well as prosecution.
4. Heard submissions and perused the record.
5 . On perusal of record, it reflects that following charges have
been framed against the petitioner in the departmental enquiry:-
// आरोप //
अपचार आर क एक वद धार बल का सद य होते हुए िनजी जीवन म
शांितपूण यवहार का उदाहरण पेश नह ं कर एवं िशखा कहार के साथ
अशोभनीय कृ य का रत कर म० ०पुिलस रे युलेशन-64 क सेवा क सामा य
शत के उपिनयम-(11) एवं म य दे श िस वल सेवा (आचरण) िनयम-1965 के
िनयम-03 म व णत शत का उ लंघन करना.
6 . In The First Information Report lodged against the petitioner
vide Annexure P-1 following allegations have been levelled against the
petitioner:-
"फ रया दया िशखा कहार पता िशव कुमार कहार उस 29 साल िन.flat no. 42 गित
प रषर नेह नगरभोपाल। ने थाना उप थत आकर एक लेखी आवेदन पेश कया
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
3 WP-30135-2025
अवलोकन करने पर थम या अंतगत धारा 376,376(2) (N) भाद व. का पाया जाने
से अपराध पंजीब कर ववेचना म िलया गया आवेदन श द व श द िन ानुशार है
ित ीमान थाना भार महोदय थाना कोलार जला भोपाल वषय- शाद का झांसा दे
कर शार रक स बंध बनाना फर शा द करने से इं कार करना मार पीट करना और जान
से मारने क धमक दे ने बावत । महोदय िनवेदन है । कं म िशखा कहार D/OF िशव
कुमार कहार flat no. 42 गितं प रषर नेह नगर भोपाल। म एक योग िश क हू ।ँ
मेर पहचान िनितन ना वक (S/o) व. भािगरथ ना वक कमलीखेड़ा फोरचून ीन
शायर थाना कोलार जला भोपाल से सन ् नव बर म सामा जक ुप से िमले उसके बाद
MSG से हमार बात हु ई फर िनितन ने मुझसे मेरा न बर मांगा पहले मेने िनितन को
अपना न. दे ने से मना कर दया फर िनितन के बार-बार मेरा न. मॉगने पर म ने उसे
अपना नं. दया। फर हमार बात फोन पर होने लगी। िनितन का घर कमलीखेड़ा म
बन रहा था। तो वह कोलार आता जाता था उसी दौरान िनितन और मेरा िमलना भी
होता था। एक दन िनितन ने मुझे उसके घर प रवार और उसके जााब के बारे म बताया
के मे पुिलस म आर क हू ।ँ और मुझे शा द के िलये Propose कया। मेरे घर वाले मेरे
िलये। लड़का दे ख रहे थे। इसिलये मेने िनितन क शा द के िलये हाँ कर द। कुछ दन
हमारा ऐसे ह िमलना जुलना चलता रहा। फर एक दन मुझे िनितन अपना
कजलीखेडा वाला घर दखाने ले गया वहां हमने ना ता कया व कोल क पी उसके
बाद मुझे च कर आने लगे। जब 1-2 घ टे बाद मुझे होश आया तो मेने दे खा मेरे कपड़े
अ त य थ थे। मेने िनितन से से पूछा क तुमने मेरे साथ ये या कया है । िनितन ने
कहा डरने क कोई बात न ह ये होता है Narmal है । जब मे रोने लगी फर िनितन मुझे
कहा क र मत परे शान मत हो हम एक ह Cast के है । जैसे ह मेरा ये घर बन जायेगा
हम शा द कर लगे। इसके बाद 15 फरवर 2021 से 16 िसत बर 2021 तक लगातार
हमारे बीच शारर क संबंध बने। एक दन िनितन नशे म मुझे उसके घर से गया घर ले
जा कर अंदर से कमरा बंद कया मेरे साथ मारपीट क और मेरे साथ जबरज ती मेरे
मेरे मना करने के बाद भी संबंध बनाय. घर म इसक मॉ सुनीता ना वक और उसक
बहने भी थी मैने िच लाया िनितन क मॉ व उसक बेहन से मदद मॉगा पर उ हे ाने
मेर कोई मदद न हं क उसके बाद िनितन क म मी ने कहा जो हु आ गलत हु आ हम
ज द ह तु हार शाद िनितन से करवा दगे। जब िनितन का घर बन गया तो मैने
िनितन को शाद करने के िलए कहा तो उसने मुझसे बात करना बंद कर दया। िनितन
व िनितन क माँ ने मेरा न. Block कर दया। फर म उससे िमल कर बात करने उसके
घर गई तो उ ह ने मेर Complent गो व द पुरा थाना म म हला े क म कर द । मुझे
गो वंद पुरा थाने मे बुलाया गया मेर बाते सुनी घटना थल कोलार का था। इसिलये
हमे कोलार थाने भेज दया गया। जब FIR होने लगी तो िनितन क माँ और बेहन
शा द के िलये तैयार हो गई। ले कन िनितन बेहोशी का नाटक करा मेने ए बुलस 108
पर Call कया व िनितन क बेहन ने बताया क हम सामुदायीक वा य के
कोलार जा रहे है । जब म और मेरे पता जी सामुदायीक वा य के पहु च
ं े तो वह
वहाँ न ह था। फर हम िनितन के घर कजलीखेड़ा पहु च ं े तो िनितन क म मी ने हमसे
कहा उसक त बयत अभी ठ क नह ं है । लेक न ज द ह प रवार के लोगो के साथ िमल
बैठ कर बात करगे उसके बाद जब मेने िनितन व उसके प रवार से call करके बात
करने क कोिशश क तो उ ह ने कोई Respons न ह कया। फर मे परे शान हो कर एक
दन िनितन के घर गई तो वह वहाँ न ह था उसको म मी ने उसे Phone करके बुलाया
काफ दे र बाद वह घर आया और मेरे साथ मार पीट क मेरा Phone भी छ न लीया।
और िनितन क म मी ने शाशक य रवा वर िनितन से लेकर अपने उपर तान ली और
मुझसे कहा क अगर अब दोबारा यहां आई तो म अपने आप को गोली मार लूग ँ ी।
उसके बाद म वहा से आ गई। उसके बाद मैने कई बार िनितन से संपक करने क
कोिशश क ले कन उसने व उसक म मी ने मेरा नं. block कर दया महोदय म आपसे
िनवेदन करना चाहती हू ँ क िनितन ना वक ने मेरा जीवन, समाज मे हमार ित ा
सब बरबाद कर द है ऐसे य को स त से स त सजा िमलनी चा हए और मुझे
याय िमलना चा हये आवेदक िशखा कहार D/O िशवकुमार कहार 7470478266
ह ता र अं ेजी मअ प है दनाँक 27/03/023"
7 . It is, thus, apparent that the petitioner has been made accused
on the strength of the aforesaid First Infomration Report under Section
376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code. On the identical allegation, the
charge-sheet issued in the departmental enquiry is based.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
4 WP-30135-2025
8. The Apex Court in the case of M/s Stanzen Toyotetsu India P.
Ltd. (supra) in paragraph 16 observed as under:-
"16. Suffice it to say that while there is
no legal bar to the holding of the
disciplinary proceedings and the
criminal trial simultaneously, stay of
disciplinary proceedings may be an
advisable course in cases where the
criminal charge against the employee is
grave and continuance of the
disciplinary proceedings is likely to
prejudice their defence before the
criminal court. Gravity of the charge is,
however, not by itself enough to
determine the question unless the charge
involves complicated question of law
and fact. The court examining the
question must also keep in mind that
criminal trials get prolonged indefinitely
especially where the number of accused
arraigned for trial is large as is the case
at hand and so are the number of
witnesses cited by the prosecution. The
court, therefore, has to draw a balance
between the need for a fair trial to the
accused on the one hand and the
competing demand for an expeditious
conclusion of the ongoing disciplinary
proceedings on the other. An early
conclusion of the disciplinary
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
5 WP-30135-2025
proceedings has itself been seen by this
Court to be in the interest of the
employees.
17. The charges levelled against the
respondents in the instant case are under
Sections 143, 147, 323, 324, 356, 427,
504, 506, 114 read with Section 149
IPC. These are no ordinary offences
being punishable with imprisonment
which may extend up to 3 years besides
fine. At the same time seriousness of the
charge alone is not the test. What is also
required to be demonstrated by the
respondents is that the case involves
complicated questions of law and fact.
That requirement does not appear to be
satisfied in an adequate measure to call
for an unconditional and complete stay
of the disciplinary proceedings pending
conclusion of the trial. The incident as
reported in the first information report
or as projected by the respondents in the
suits filed by them does not suggest any
complication or complexity either on
facts or law.
18. That apart, the respondents have
already disclosed the defence in the
explanation submitted by them before
the commencement of the departmental
enquiry in which one witness has been
examined by each of the enquiry
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
6 WP-30135-2025
officers. The charge-sheet, it is evident
from the record, was filed on 20-8-2011.
The charges were framed on 20-12-
2011. The trial court has ever since then
examined only three witnesses so far
out of a total of 23 witnesses cited in the
charge-sheet. Going by the pace at
which the trial court is examining the
witnesses, it would take another five
years before the trial may be concluded.
The High Court has in the judgment
under appeal given five months to the
trial court to conclude the trial. More
than fifteen months has rolled by ever
since that order, without the trial going
anywhere near completion. The
disciplinary proceedings cannot remain
stayed for an indefinitely long period.
Such inordinate delay is neither in the
interest of the appellant Company nor
the respondents who are under
suspension and surviving on subsistence
allowance. The number of accused
implicated in the case is also very large.
We are not suggesting that the incident
must be taken to be false only because
such a large number could not
participate in the incident. But there is a
general tendency to spread the net wider
and even implicate those who were not
concerned with the commission of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
7 WP-30135-2025
offences or who even though present
committed no overt act to show that they
shared the common object of the
assembly or be responsible for the
riotous behaviour of other accused
persons. Interest of such accused as may
be innocent also cannot be ignored nor
can they be made to suffer indefinitely
just because some others have
committed an offence or offences.
19. In the circumstances and taking into
consideration all aspects mentioned
above as also keeping in view the fact
that all the three courts below have
exercised their discretion in favour of
staying the ongoing disciplinary
proceedings, we do not consider it fit to
vacate the said order straightaway.
Interests of justice would, in our
opinion, be sufficiently served if we
direct the court dealing with the
criminal charges against the respondents
to conclude the proceedings as
expeditiously as possible but in any case
within a period of one year from the
date of this order. We hope and trust
that the trial court will take effective
steps to ensure that the witnesses are
served, appear and are examined. The
court may for that purpose adjourn the
case for no more than a fortnight every
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
8 WP-30135-2025
time an adjournment is necessary. We
also expect the accused in the criminal
case to cooperate with the trial court for
an early completion of the proceedings.
We say so because experience has
shown that the trials often linger on for a
long time on account of non-availability
of the defence lawyers to cross-examine
the witnesses or on account of
adjournments sought by them on the
flimsiest of the grounds. All that needs
to be avoided. In case, however, the trial
is not completed within the period of
one year from the date of this order,
despite the steps which the trial court
has been directed to take the disciplinary
proceedings initiated against the
respondents shall be resumed and
concluded by the inquiry officer
concerned. The impugned orders shall
in that case stand vacated upon expiry of
the period of one year from the date of
the order."
9. Thus, considering the decision of the Apex Court, the trial Court
concerned is expected to make all endeavour to conclude the trial as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year from the
date of production of certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall
co-operate with the trial and if trial is not completed within one year
from this order, the disciplinary proceedings shall be resumed and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:39996
9 WP-30135-2025
completed by the enquiry officer concerned.
1 0 . If this order is not produced before the trial Court by the
petitioner within 15 days from today, this order shall lose its efficacy
automatically without further reference to the Bench.
11. For a period of one year or till the conclusion of prosecution
(whichever is earlier), the disciplinary proceedings shall be kept in
abeyance.
12. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
PB
