[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 February, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5280
1 MCRC-2307-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 20th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2307 of 2026
SUNIL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ravindra Singh Parmar advocate for applicant.
Shri Gajendra Singh Dodia public prosecutor for State.
Shri Rudra Tiwari advocate for objector.
ORDER
1 . This first application has been filed by applicant under
Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of
regular bail in connection with Crime No. 402 of 2025 registered at
Police Station- Suthalia (Mau) District Rajgadh (M.P.) for offence
punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 64(2)(m), 65(1), 78(1)(i), 87
of the BNS, 2023 and 5l, 6 of the POCSO Act. Applicant is in judicial
custody since 25.12.2025.
2. Heard the arguments.
3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application,
case diary and the relevant material on record.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5280
2 MCRC-2307-2026
mentioned in the application submits that the applicant is falsely
implicated in the alleged offence over the dispute of possession on a
piece of land between the family members. Learned counsel referring to
the order dated 8.9.2016 passed in case No. 257/Fojdari/2014 submits
that grand-father of the victim had falsely alleged disturbance of
possession by the grand-father of the applicant. The allegation was
dismissed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Biaora Rajgadh. The rivalry
between the parties is continuing. The DNA examination report
exonerates the applicant. No offence, as alleged, is committed by the
applicant. The allegations, reflected in the FIR and the statement of
victim, are highly improbable and inconsistent. Applicant has clean past,
with family roots. There is no history of evading process of law. There is
no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant for the reason
that he is not capable of influencing the witness. The final report has
been submitted on completion of investigation. The trial would take time
to conclude. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the young applicant.
Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial. The alleged offence is not
heinous or brutal in nature affecting society at large.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State ably assisted by
counsel for the objector, opposes the application on the ground of gravity
of alleged offence. Learned counsel further referring to the DNA
examination report submits that the DNA profile extracted from source
material of the victim does not match with the DNA profile extracted
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5280
3 MCRC-2307-2026
from source material of the applicant. After going through the case diary,
he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the
applicant. Applicant is aged 23 years. He is labourer by profession.
6. As per the accusation on case diary, applicant Sunil
committed rape with the victim in the night of 17.12.2025 around 2:00
am when she went out of the house to answer the nature's call.
Thereafter, Sunil called her to his house and committed rape with her on
multiple occasions. She informed her parents and came to report. On
such allegations, the Police Station Suthaliya registered FIR for offence
punishable under Sections 78(1)(i), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1), 115(2), 351(3)
of BNS and Section 5l, 6 of POCSO Act. The applicant was arrested on
25.12.2025. He is in custody ever since. The DNA report does not
substantiate the allegation of penetrative sexual assault by applicant. The
final report has been filed on completion of investigation. The trial is
under way. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie
merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of the
prosecution and complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence will be
considered after evidence in trial.
7. As informed, the applicant is still dependent on family and
survives on occasional labour work. Considering these aspects, there
appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence of any
criminal antecedent, considering the socio-economic status of the
applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of recidivism or tampering
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5280
4 MCRC-2307-2026
with evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There
appears to be no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the
young applicant. However, the observations, herein-above, are recorded
for present application only.
8. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of
the case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the
merits, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the
application is allowed.
9. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant- Sunil shall be
released on bail in connection with Crime, as mentioned in first
paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of the same
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for compliance with the
following conditions : (For convenience of understanding by accused
and surety, the conditions of bail are also reproduced in Hindi as under):-
(1) Applicant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the concerned
court;
(1) आवेदक संबंिधत यायालय के िनदशानुसार सुनवाई क येक ितिथ पर उप थत रहे गा ।
(2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) आवेदक समान कृ ित का केाई अपराध नह ं करे गा या उसम स मिलत नह ं होगा ।
(3) 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/him/her from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to the police officer;
(3) आवेदक करण के त य से प रिचत कसी य को य या अ य प से लोभन, धमक
या वचन नह ं दे गा, जससे ऐसा य ऐसे त य को यायालय या पुिलस अिधकार को कट करने से
िनवा रत हो
(4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the evidence or allure,
pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) आवदे क य या अ य प से सा य के साथ छे डछाड करने का या सा ी या सा य को
बहलाने-फुसलाने, दबाव डालने या धमकाने का यास नह ं करे गा ।
(5) During trial, the applicant shall ensure due compliance of provisions of Section 309 of
Cr.P.C./346 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding examination of witnesses in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5280
5 MCRC-2307-2026
attendance;
(5) वचारण के दौरान, उप थत गवाह से पर ण के संबंध म आवेदक धारा ३०९ दं . .सं./ ३४६
भारतीय नाग रक सुर ा सं हता, 2023 के ावधान का उिचत अनुपालन सुिन त करे गा ।
10. This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in
case of breach of any of the preconditions of bail, the trial Court may
consider, on merit, cancellation of bail without any impediment from this
order.
11. The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the
personal bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If
any of them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he/she had
explained the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
BDJ
