[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijay Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11930
1 MCRC-15608-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 10th OF APRIL, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 15608 of 2026
VIJAY AHIRWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Mukesh Chandra Pathak - Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Harish Sharma Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.
Mr. Pooran Chand Soni - Advocate for respondent/complainant.
ORDER
This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
BNSS for grant of bail relating to Crime No.325/2024 registered at Police
Station -Chanderi, District - Ashoknagar (M.P.) for the offence under
Sections 363 of IPC. Further added Sections 366(A), 376 of IPC and Section
5/6 of POCSO Act.
2. Allegation against the present applicant is that he committed rape
upon the prosecutrix.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated. The applicant has been in custody
since 17.09.2025. The investigation is complete, and the charge sheet has
been filed. The prosecutrix, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of
the BNSS, has stated that she accompanied the applicant of her own free will.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11930
2 MCRC-15608-2026
Notably, she did not oppose the applicant at any stage of the alleged
incident. At the most, this is the case of consensual relationship between two
persons. It is further submitted that since all material prosecution witnesses
have been examined before the learned trial Court, the question of
influencing them does not arise. It is further submitted that the same
prosecutrix had previously lodged another report against the present
applicant. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. The
applicant is permanent resident of District -Ashoknagar and there is no
possibility of his absconsion and tampering with the prosecution evidence.
Hence, prayed for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as counsel for the
complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its
rejection.
5. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without
expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and
it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court/Committal Court.
7. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the applicant:-
i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11930
3 MCRC-15608-2026
bond executed by him/her;
ii) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case
may be;
iii) The applicant will not indulge himself/herself in extending
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the
case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to
the Police Officer, as the case may be;
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence
of which he/she is accused;
v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and
vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
8. E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
(LJ*)
