[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr. Praful vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68971
1 MCRC-57916-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 17 th OF DECEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 57916 of 2025
DR. PRAFUL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Vishal Vincent Rajendra Daniel - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri C.K. Mishra - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Abhay Sougoura - Advocate for the objector.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in connection
with Crime No.699/2025 registered at Police Station - Garha, District Jabalpur for
the offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no case against the
applicant is made out. As per the prosecution story itself, the victim is 45 years old
and she has two children. Her daughter is 25 years old and her son is 22 years old.
Her husband died on 29.03.2025 and during his treatment, she came into contact
and acquainted with the doctor/applicant. After that, her sister was suffering from
back pain and on that she went along with her sister for her treatment to Jabalpur
before the applicant and the applicant treated her sister. Thereafter, the applicant
proposed the victim for marriage. On that, she has stated that she is elder to him
and she is having two children but the applicant insisted for marriage. In the first
time physical relations were established on 25.02.2023 when the victim came to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68971
2 MCRC-57916-2025
Jabalpur in relation of marriage of her friend and after that 2 to 3 years, they were
in physical relations and after that when the victim came to know that the applicant
is going to marry with another person. On that, she stated to applicant that she will
lodge FIR. On that, the applicant called her and on 31.10.2025 she came to
Jabalpur and visited Tripur Sundari Temple and the applicant and the victim talked
to each other and she came to applicant's house where she stayed in the night and
physical relations were established and assured that in December they will meet
and asked him to visit Delhi and after that she returned to her house. Thereafter,
after 8 to 10 days, the applicant stopped talking to the victim. On that, the FIR was
registered on the ground that the applicant has physically assaulted her in the
pretext of marriage.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is
innocent and falsely been implicated in the case. He is relying on the judgments of
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of
Maharashtra (2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of U.P. (2021) 18 SCC 517 , Jaspal
Singh Kaural v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2025) 5 SCC 756 , Shiv Pratap Singh Rana
vs. State of M.P. (2024) 8 SCC 313 , Piyush Chouhan vs. State of M.P., 2025 SCC
Online MP 2162 and other judgments. Learned counsel has further submitted that
there is big difference between the sexual intercourse on the false promise of
marriage and physical relations with the understanding to marry but break down
due to other reasons, and submitted that to constitute the offence under Section 69
of BNS, 2023, it should be that the applicant from the very beginning having the
intention to defraud the victim and established the physical relation and never
intended to marry the victim whereas a person who is having intention to marry
and establish physical relation but later on due to some unavoidable reasons, the
marriage is not being solemnized. Under these circumstances, the offence under
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68971
3 MCRC-57916-2025
Section 69 could not be made out. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released
on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the objector has opposed the anticipatory bail
application and submitted that no case of bail is made out as the applicant has
exploited the victim on the false pretext of marriage.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and reading
the FIR and statements of victim has submitted that no case of anticipatory bail is
made out. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.
6. Heard the parties and perused the case diary.
7. The victim is major 45 years old lady having two children who
themselves are major. Her husband died during Corona virus period and after that
she herself has visited time and again to Jabalpur. The applicant has never visited
the resident of the victim. Furthermore, first time, the physical relation was
established on 25.02.2023 and the FIR was lodged on 01.12.2025. In this period,
the victim came to know that the applicant has denied to marry at the time of
Diwali, 2025 and after that she visited the applicant and stayed with him.
8. Considering the above factors into consideration, this Court deems it
appropriate to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. Thus, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
9. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Arresting Officer for his appearance before him during the course of investigation
or before the trial Court concerned during trial, as the case may be.
10. The applicant is directed to cooperate with the investigating agency and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68971
4 MCRC-57916-2025
also appear on the date and time directed by the Investigating Officer.
11. The applicant is directed that if police authority demands, he shall give
the sample of his blood and other body fluid for examination and undergo for the
medical examination.
12. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly induce or threaten any
prosecution witness.
13. The applicant will regularly appear before the trial Court and cooperate
till disposal of this case.
14. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions as
enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
15. Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
VB*
