Madhya Pradesh High Court
Saurabh Singh Tomar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:4772
1 MCRC-4329-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 30 th OF JANUARY, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4329 of 2025
SAURABH SINGH TOMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri D.K. Jain - Advocate with Shri U.K. Vaidya - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri S.M. Patel - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
None for the victim despite service of notice.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under section 482 of
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail relating to
FIR No.31/2025, dated 16.01.2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District
Narmadapuram (M.P.) for commission of offence under Section 69 of Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Applicant apprehending his arrest in the aforesaid offence
has knocked at the portal of this Court for grant of anticipatory bail.
2. As per prosecution story, on 16.01.2025, 25 years old prosecutrix submitted
an application before the Police Station Kotwali, District Narmadapuram stating
that she knew Saurabh Singh Tomar, Head Constable posted in Police Department
Narmadapuram at Police Station Panchmadi for the last 8 years. It is alleged that
on 08.10.2017 Saurabh called her at old Police Line quarter, Hoshangabad and
established physical relation with her on the pretext of marriage. They repeatedly
established physical relation. She is insisting Saurabh to enter into wedlock for the
last two years, but he is not ready to perform marriage with her. Therefore, FIR
was registered.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:4772
2 MCRC-4329-2025
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed
any offence. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. He and prosecutrix
both are major and they were having consensual sexual relationship. Prosecutrix
was living in live-in relationship with him for the last 7 - 8 years. It is further
submitted that under Section 69 of BNS maximum punishment is 10 years. It is
further submitted that he being Police Constable is government servant and there is
no possibility of his fleeing from justice. Therefore, it is prayed that applicant
may be released on anticipatory bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, but has fairly admitted that the
prosecutrix is a major and was in relationship with the applicant for almost 7 - 8
years. It is further contended that the applicant is a habitual offendor as one case
was registered against him in 2017.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that case was lodged against
him by wife Taruna Tikariya and in that case he has already been acquitted. Copy
of the judgment dated 22.10..2021 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act
is placed on record.
6. Admittedly, prosecutrix and applicant, who are major, remained in
relationship almost for a period of 7 years. Now relationship is not working as
applicant has refused to enter into wedlock. Having taken into consideration all the
facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits
of the case, I deem it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Consequently, this
application under Section 482 of the BNSS,2023 for grant of anticipatory bail filed
on behalf of applicant stands allowed.
7. It is directed that in the event of arrest applicant Saurabh Singh Tomar be
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:4772
3 MCRC-4329-2025
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Arresting Authority. At stage of filing of charge-sheet by police,
applicant shall furnish fresh bail bond of same amount before trial Court to its
satisfaction subject to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as
and when required;
(ii) Applicant is directed to join investigation, then and there.
(iii) Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them
from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iv) In case, applicant is not arrested within a period of 07 days by the
Investigation Officer from today, he shall surrender himself before the
Investigation Officer within 07 days' from today failing which this order shall
become ineffective.
8. However, it is being made clear that in case of bail jump and in violation of any
of conditions imposed herein above, this order shall become ineffective and
Investigation Officer/Trial Court shall be at liberty to proceed against the applicant
as per law.
Certified copy as per rules
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
Vin**
