[Cites 21, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Suraj Meena @ Bareek vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 March, 2026
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7034
1 MCRC-5123-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 16th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5123 of 2026
SURAJ MEENA @ BAREEK
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Umesh Sharma through V.C. along with Shri Akhilesh Kumar
Choudhary - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Romil Verma GA for the State.
ORDER
1. Learned counsel for the State informs that notice to the victim has
duly been served.
2. This second 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. 32 of 2024 registered at Police Station- Mahila
Thana, Ujjain, District- Ujjain, (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections
363, 366-A, 342, 370, 373, 376, 376(2)(n), 109, 34 of the IPC and sections 3,
4, 5L/6, 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act and sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Applicant is in judicial custody
since 28/05/2025.
3. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 06/11/2025 passed in MCRC no. 49104 of 2025 with a liberty to renew
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7034
2 MCRC-5123-2026
the prayer after evidence of the victim and her parental aunt (father's sister)
before the trial Court.
4. Heard the arguments.
5. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case
diary and the relevant material on record.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds
mentioned in the application submits that the applicant is falsely implicated
in the alleged offence. No offence, as alleged, is committed by the applicant.
The victim [PW-2] and her parental aunt [PW-1] have been examined before
the trial Court. They exonerated the applicant of the alleged offence. The
DNA examination report also exonerates the applicant. The fate of the
prosecution against the applicant is apparent. There is no likelihood of
tampering with remaining evidence by the applicant. The trial would take
time to conclude. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant and
the dependent family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial
7 . Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application
on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. Learned counsel further refers
to 11 criminal antecedents as mentioned in the case diary. Applicant is aged
35 years. He is a driver by profession.
8. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant was acquitted in relation to Crime nos. 30/2012, 559/2014,
205/2015, 353/2019, 696/2019 and 49/2022. Other matters are pending for
trial.
9. As per the accusation on case diary, the victim aged around 17
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7034
3 MCRC-5123-2026
years submitted a written complaint to the SHO of Police Station - Women
Cell, Ujjain on 25/05/2024 inter-alia alleging that Bhawna @ Shivani
induced her to come to Ujjain for salon work. So, she came to Ujjain on
20/04/2024. Bhawna @ Shivani introduced her to accused Harsh. Bhawna @
Shivani and Harsh kept her in a rented house and forced her for prostitution.
He committed rape on her. When Bhawna @ Shivani was shifting her to
some place, her paternal aunt met her at Chamunda Chouraha, Ujjain, She
informed her parental aunt. On 13/05/2024 around 7:30 in the
evening, Bhawna @ Shivani sent a man to her room, who committed rape
with her. On such allegations, the Police Station - Women Cell, Ujjain
registered FIR for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 342, 370,
373, 376, 376(2)(n), 109, 34 of the IPC and sections 3, 4, 5L/6, 16 and 17 of
the POCSO Act and sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, 1956 against Bhawna @ Shivani, Harsh, Payal and other
accused. Later, in supplementary statement recorded on 06/06/2025, the
victim alleged that Suraj had also committed rape with her. Accordingly,
Suraj was arrested on 28/05/2025 and he is in custody ever since. The final
report has been filed on completion of investigation and the trial is under
way. The victim and her parental aunt have been examined before the trial
Court. They did not support the prosecution against the applicant. The DNA
extracted from the clothes of victim did not match with the DNA extracted
from the blood sample of applicant. The trial would take time to
conclude. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit
and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7034
4 MCRC-5123-2026
prosecution and complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence will be
considered after evidence in trial.
10. As informed, the applicant has family responsibilities of aged
parents. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of
fleeing from justice. Considering the socio-economic status of the applicant,
there appears to be no likelihood of recidivism or tampering with evidence
or influencing the remaining witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be
no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However,
the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.
11. 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, however, on stringent conditions in view of his
criminal antecedents.
12. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant- -Suraj 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 asunder):-
(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
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:7034
5 MCRC-5123-2026
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 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 ।
(6) The applicant shall mark his presence before the SHO, P.S.- Women Cell, Ujjain,
District Ujjain (M.P.) on first Saturday of every month till conclusion of trial. A copy of
this order be forwarded to the concerned SHO for compliance with the case diary.
13.. 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 of this order.
14. 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 had explained
the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
amol
