Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prathavi Shakwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 August, 2025
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17573
1 MCRC-26987-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 12th OF AUGUST, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 26987 of 2025
PRATHAVI SHAKWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashok Jain - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Deependra Singh Kushwah - AAG for the State.
ORDER
This is the fifth application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail
in connection with Crime No.573/2023 registered at Police Station Padav,
District Gwalior (M.P.) for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n),
376, 363, 366, 370, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 3,
4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections
3, 4, 5 & 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
As per the prosecution, serious allegations have been levelled against
the applicant, including the commission of rape upon a minor prosecutrix
(aged approximately 15 years) in Room No. 107 of Hotel Amar Palace. The
applicant was arrested on 02.10.2023.
Upon careful consideration of the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties, as well as thorough perusal of the case diary,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 8/14/2025
11:38:24 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17573
2 MCRC-26987-2025
statements of witnesses including the prosecutrix, and documents annexed
with the application, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant
does not deserve the benefit of bail at this stage, as the gravity and heinous
nature of the alleged offences, particularly those under Sections 376(2)(n)
and 376 IPC and provisions of the POCSO Act, involving a minor victim,
cannot be overlooked and the prosecutrix, aged around 15 years, in her
statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, has specifically named the
applicant and has reiterated the allegations of sexual assault, abduction, and
exploitation, thereby lending credence to the prosecution’s case. Her
testimony remains consistent and supports the chain of events as alleged in
the FIR and charge sheet.
It is also noteworthy that the second bail application filed by the
applicant was already dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated
09.01.2025 and the prosecutrix was examined on 10.01.2025, and in her
deposition, she has fully supported the prosecution’s case. No substantial or
material change in circumstances has been demonstrated in the present
(third) application which may justify a departure from the earlier view taken
by this Court. The settled principle of law is that successive bail applications
can be entertained only, if there is a significant change in fact or in law
which has a direct bearing on the case and affects the outcome of the earlier
decision, which is clearly absent in the present matter. Additionally, the
allegations pertain not only to sexual offences but also involve charges under
the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, suggesting a broader pattern of
criminal conduct, and raising serious concerns regarding the applicant’s
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 8/14/2025
11:38:24 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:17573
3 MCRC-26987-2025
potential role in human trafficking and exploitation. Such offences strike at
the root of societal morality and public conscience.
Given the above, this Court does not find it appropriate to exercise its
discretion in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, this third application is
hereby rejected.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 8/14/2025
11:38:24 AM
[ad_1]
Source link