Shriram Patel (Kachhi) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:51762
1 MCRC-10827-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
th
ON THE 14 OF JULY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 10827 of 2026
SHRIRAM PATEL (KACHHI)
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Shishir Verma - Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Vineeta Sharma - Dy.G.A. for the respondent No.1/State.
ORDER
By way of filing this petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. the
applicant has prayed for quashing of F.I.R. and consequential proceeding
relating to Crime No.268/2024 registered at P.S. Jabera, District Damoh
(M.P.) for the offences under Section 87, 137(2), 64(2)(m) of B.N.S. and
Section 3/4 of POCSO Act.
2. Brief facts of the case is that complainant lodged a report to the
effect that her daughter is missing from the house. Later on, prosecutrix
recovered with the applicant. It is alleged that the accused/applicant took the
prosecutrix to Ajmer (Rajasthan) and kept in a rented premise where he had
developed physical relationships with her due to which she became pregnant.
Therefore, Police has registered FIR against the applicant bearing Crime
No.268/2024 registered at P.S. Jabera, District Damoh (M.P.) for the
offences under Section 87, 137(2), 64(2)(m) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHAMMED
MOHSIN QURESHI
Signing time: 15-07-2026
10:50:23

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:51762
2 MCRC-10827-2026
POCSO Act. After investigation, police had filed charge-sheet before the

Competent Court and after committal Case No.SC/33/2025 was registered,
which is pending in the Court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/III Additional
Sessions Judge, District Damoh (M.P.).
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
innocent. The prosecutrix is consenting party. After attaining the age of
majority, the prosecutrix and the applicant both have solemnized marriage
and out of their wedlock one child is also born. The prosecutrix is living in
the house of applicant as his wife. It is further submitted that the statements
of prosecutrix (PW/1), her mother (PW/2) and father (PW/3) have been
recorded before the Trial Court and they have not supported the prosecution
story. Therefore, it is prayed for quashing the FIR and consequential criminal
proceedings arising from the said aforesaid crime number.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the prayer of
the applicant on the ground that at the time of incident, the age of prosecutrix
was below 15 years. In the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.,
the prosecutrix has deposed against the applicant. After investigation, charge
sheet was filed against the applicant before the Competent Court and after
committal Case No.SC/33/2025 was registered, which is pending in the
Court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/III Additional Sessions Judge, District
Damoh (M.P.). Material witnesses have yet to be examined before the Trial
Court and the trial is pending. D.N.A. report is positive. The appreciation of
evidence and determination of guilt or acquittal is exclusively within the
domain of Trial Court. Therefore, prayed for rejection of this instant petition.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHAMMED
MOHSIN QURESHI
Signing time: 15-07-2026
10:50:23

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:51762
3 MCRC-10827-2026
5. Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and

perused the material available on record.
6. The inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is
extraordinary in nature and is required to be exercised sparingly, with due
caution and only to prevent the abuse of the process of law and to secure the
ends of justice. In this matter, when trial is pending in the concerned Trial
Court, this Court is not expected to appreciate the evidence. In this matter,
the evidence collected during investigation prima facie discloses the
commission of cognizable offence, therefore criminal proceeding of the Trial
Court should not be interfered under inherent jurisdiction. In this case, there
is allegation of rape upon a minor girl below 15 years of age and the case is
registered under Section 87, 137(2), 64(2)(m) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of
POCSO Act. The prosecutrix has delivered a child. The D.N.A. report shows
that the applicant is the biological father of the child. The Trial Court will
decide the case after appreciation of evidence. Merely because the
prosecutrix and her parents have not supported the prosecution case does not
constitute a ground for quashing the prosecution, particularly when it
involves serious and non-compoundable offences under B.N.S. and POCSO
Act. The consent of minor prosecutrix is immaterial. Since trial is pending
and material witnesses have yet to be examined, therefore any evaluation of
evidence by this Court at this stage would amount to premature adjudication.
7. Looking to aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case in which inherent
powers of this Court can be invoked to quash the FIR lodged by the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHAMMED
MOHSIN QURESHI
Signing time: 15-07-2026
10:50:23

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:51762
4 MCRC-10827-2026
complainant.

8. Consequently, present petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.
stands dismissed.
9. It is made clear that any observations made herein are only for the
purpose of deciding the present petition and shall not be construed as an
expression on the merits of the case. Learned Trial Court shall proceed with
the matter without influencing the observations made by this Court and shall
decide the case in accordance with law.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
mohsin

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHAMMED
MOHSIN QURESHI
Signing time: 15-07-2026
10:50:23