[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravi Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 December, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
1 CRA-3578-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY
ON THE 17th OF DECEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3578 of 2024
RAVI KOL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Vijit Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of I.A.
No.14706/2025, which is first application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No.14706/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the case is heard
finally.
This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of judgment dated
30/11/2023 passed in Special Case No.107/2022 by learned Special Judge
(POSCO Act) and 18th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur (MP) whereby
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
2 CRA-3578-2024
appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following terms:-
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
in lieu of fine
R.I. for R.I for 06
366 IPC Rs.1,000/-
05 years months
R.I. for 20 R.I. for 06
5(l) r/w 6 POCSO Rs.2,000/-
years months
2. Story of the prosecution, in short, is that on 31/01/2022 mother of
the victim approached Police Station, Madhotal and registered case Crime
No.81/2022 under Section 363 of IPC being a missing person report of her
daughter who had gone missing on 31/01/2022 when complainant returned
back to her home at about 13.00 hours.
3. On 23/04/2022 victim was recovered. Her statement under Section
164 of Cr.P.C. were recorded. She was subjected to medical examination,
report of which is Ex.P/16, thereafter seizure etc. were made and victim was
handed over to her mother. After completion of investigation, charge sheet
was filed and the appellant has been convicted as mentioned above.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that lady doctor
i.e. Dr.Archana Grover (PW-8) deposed in her examination-in-chief that she
had advised x-ray of long bone for age determination. It is pointed out that
as per x-ray report, age of the victim was more than 18 years. This
document is available on record. X-ray report was produced by the
prosecution which was not exhibited by the Public Prosecutor and learned
trial Court also failed to look into the document produced by the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
3 CRA-3578-2024
prosecution. However, we are constrained to note that learned Special Judge
did not deem it proper to exercise her authority under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.
and call for further evidence on the said document i.e. x-ray film and report
which were furnished by Dr. M.K. Mishra, Registration No.12927,
Radiologist Class-I, District Hospital, Jabalpur.
5. We propose to issue a show cause notice to the concerned
Special Judge as well as the Public Prosecutor for such a major lapse in
doing injustice to the accused and putting him behind bar for over three years
overlooking the fact that victim was a consulting adult, therefore, conviction
could not have been made. This is a sign of intellectual dishonesty on the
part of the Special Judge. Registry is requested to issue a show cause notice
to the concerned Special Judge and the Public Prosecutor calling for their
explanation.
6. As far as merits are concerned, law laid down by the Division
Bench of this Court in the case of Lallusingh S/o Jagdishsingh Samgar Vs.
State of M.P., 1996 MPLJ 452 is that despite the absence of formal proof of
document of dying declaration, the same can be made use of by the accused
in his defence, accused can take the advantage of the document even without
proof of the same. Similarly, the medical certificate showing the injuries on
the body of the accused can also be made use of by the accused despite
absence of formal proof. Para-6 of the said judgement reads as under :
"6. We deprecate the method of prosecution of
withholding the evidence collected during
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
4 CRA-3578-2024
investigation. The prosecutor is a 'State' and, therefore,
the prosecution should be fair enough to produce all the
evidence collected during investigation and it should be
left to the Court to come to its own conclusion on the
facts proved before him or the Court concerned.
But, despite the absence of formal proof of
document of dying declaration, the same can be made
use of by the accused in his defence, accused can take
the advantage of the document even without proof of
the same. Similarly, the medical certificate showing the
injuries on the body of the accused can also be made
use of by the accused despite absence of formal proof.
7. In the present case, admittedly, prosecution had produced the x-ray
report which is available on record as discussed above and that x-report
categorically mentioned a fact that victim was above 18 years of age.
Therefore, when these facts are taken into consideration, then there appears
to be no need to discuss any other evidence except the evidence of the victim
(PW-1) to find out as to whether she was a consenting party or not.
8. In her examination-in-chief, victim (PW-1) deposed that
appellant-Ravi Kol is known to her. He is residing in the village of her
Mausi i.e. Village Tilghawan, therefore, he is known to her. 6-7 months
prior she had gone with Ravi to village Semariya. Thereafter he had
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
5 CRA-3578-2024
performed marriage with her at a temple. She had stayed with the appellant
for about two months. During this period, they had established physical
relationship. Victim (PW-1) also deposed that she was apprehended from
Village Tilghawan by the Police authorities.
9. In cross-examination, this witness deposed that she is the only
child of her parents. Her parents are illiterate. Her father is working as a
labourer. She met appellant-Ravi Kol in his village i.e. Tilghawan.
Tilghawan is at a distance about two hours from her place of residence.
Since her Mausi is residing at Tilghawan, she had met Ravi at Tilghawan.
House of Ravi is situated at a distance of half km. from the house of her
Mausi. This witness (victim) admitted that she had became a friendship with
Ravi at the place of another friend 'R'. 'R' is also residing at Tilghawan in
front of house of her Mausi. This witness admitted that her friendship with
'R' is about 3-4 years old. Thereafter victim deposed that she had met Ravi
at the Hanuman Temple. Victim admitted that she had performed marriage
at Hanumantal, Jabalpur temple in front of Jain temple. Victim also deposed
that her parents have no knowledge about that marriage. Then in para-5,
victim (PW-1) deposed that she had performed marriage on her own volition
with the appellant and appellant had not forced her or coerced her for
performing marriage.
10. When these facts are taken into consideration, then a consensual
relationship between two consenting adults is not an offence. Thus, the
impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. Trial Court has committed a
grave error in conducting the trial.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68694
6 CRA-3578-2024
11. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed. Impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence is hereby set aside and the appellant is
acquitted of all the charges. Appellant is in jail, he be released immediately,
if not required in any other case.
12. Record of the trial Court be sent back immediately.
13. Explanation of the concerned Special Judge and the Public
Prosecutor who conducted trial be called for and be placed in Chamber for
our perusal and directing further action in accordance with law.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
