Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajendra @ Nandkishore Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 October, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal, Avanindra Kumar Singh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50721
1 CRA-2612-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 8 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2612 of 2025
RAJENDRA @ NANDKISHORE PATEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manish Awasthi - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar - Government Advocate appearing on behalf of
Advocate General for State of M.P.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of
I.A. No.14666 of 2025 first application under Section 430 (1) of B.N.S.S.
2023 for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.14666 of 2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard
finally.
The appellant is aggrieved of the judgment dated 11.02.2025 passed
by Special Judgment (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
2012) in S.C. No.17 of 2024 by which the appellant has been convicted and
sentenced as under :-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50721
2 CRA-2612-2025
Conviction S e n t e n ce
Section Act Imprisonment Fine if Imprisonment
fine deposited in lieu of Fine
details
5(M)/6 Protection Life Rs.1000/- Additional R.I.
of Children Imprisonment for 3 months.
from
Sexual
Offences
Act 2012
5(N)/6 Protection Life Rs.1000/- Additional R.I.
of Children Imprisonment for 3 months.
from
Sexual
Offences
Act 2012
2. Shri Manish Awasthy, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is innocent. Its a case of false implication and the appellant is
real uncle of the victim. On account of property dispute, he has been falsely
implicated. Reading from evidence of the victim PW-1, it is pointed out that
victim has admitted that she has been tutored by her mother and therefore a
tutored statement of the victim will not be sufficient to maintain conviction
as recorded by learned trial court.
3. It is also summitted that Dr. Meghna Bhatnagar (PW-13) has
categorically stated in Para-3 that whenever she was enquiring about the
incident from the victim, her mother was stopping her and victim was being
interrupted continuously by her mother. In para-4 of her cross-
examination, Dr. Meghna Bhatnagar (PW-13) has admitted that upon
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50721
3 CRA-2612-2025
examination of the victim and also on examination of her clothing, she did
not find any act being performed upon the victim. Learned counsel for the
appellant further submits that he is mentally and physically retarded person.
He has 75% disability as can be seen from vide Ex.D-4. Thus, it is
summitted that its a case of false accusation where acquittal should be
recorded.
4. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Public Prosecutor in his turn submits
that D.N.A. report (Ex.P-25) is on record. It reveals that mixed (Y-STR)
DNA Profile obtained from the slex of the victim revealed (Y-STR) DNA
obtained from the blood sample of the appellant Rajendra @ Nand Kishor
Patel and thus, it is submitted that conviction be maintained and no
interference is called for.
5. Though a plea of mental and retardedness is taken but that has not
been substantiated by examining any competent doctor so as to accrue any
advantage in favour of the appellant.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record, evidence of PW-1 is very relevant. She is the victim. She has stated
that the appellant had touched his pennis with the body of the victim but she
has not alleged any penetrative sexual assault. She has admitted that at the
time of the incident her grand- father was at home and her father had reached
the place of incident and had kicked the appellant. She has also admitted that
she was taken to the hospital in the same clothing which she was wearing at
the time of incident. Thus, when these facts are taken into consideration in
conjunction with the opinion of Dr. Meghna Bhatnagar (PW-13), who has
categorically stated that on physical examination of the victim, she had not
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:50721
4 CRA-2612-2025
detected any injury on her body and has further stated that no incident was
found to have taken place with the victim, but since FSL report (Ex.P-25) is
positive, present will be a case which will fall under Section 7 of
the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 i.e. a case of non-
penetrative sexual assault.
7. Thus, the impugned judgment dated 11.02.2025 passed by Special
Judgment (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012) in S.C.
No.17 of 2024 convicting the appellant for Life Imprisonment under
Section 5(M)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
2012 and under Section 5(N)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act 2012 convicting the appellant for Life Imprisonment is
modified to one of conviction under Section 7 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and he is directed to undergo sentence for
three years under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act 2012.
8. The appeal is partly allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid
modification.
9. Record of the trial court be sent back.
10. Case property be disposed off in terms of the judgment of the trial
court.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
bks
