BAIL GRANTED: VOLUNTARY RELATIONSHIP WITH MINOR PROSECUTRIX AND CONSENT ARE GROUNDS FOR BAIL.

The applicant, Abhishek Parihar alias Abbu, was arrested on January 5, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 at Police Station Aron, District Guna (M.P.).

He was charged under Sections 137(2), 64(2), 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), read with Sections 5 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Allegations against him include kidnapping, rape, and offenses under the POCSO Act, concerning a prosecutrix stated to be 15 years and 9 months old.

The applicant's counsel contended that the prosecutrix voluntarily accompanied the applicant due to a consensual relationship, expressing a desire to marry him, and that physical relations were established with her consent.

They highlighted that her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS did not allege force or non-consensual intercourse.

The defense further argued that the FIR was registered based on the father's suspicion and the prosecutrix's age, not direct allegations.

The applicant has been in judicial custody since January 5, 2026, and the charge-sheet has been filed, with the trial likely to take considerable time.

The applicant is a permanent resident of District Guna.

1. Whether the applicant, Abhishek Parihar alias Abbu, should be granted bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the allegations of kidnapping, rape, and offenses under the POCSO Act.

The court considered the application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The granting of bail inherently involves principles of individual liberty, the right to a speedy trial, and the impact of prolonged pre-trial detention, especially when investigation is complete and trial is pending.

The discretion to grant bail is typically exercised when there is no likelihood of the accused absconding or tampering with evidence, and the trial is likely to be prolonged.

The court considered the applicant's argument that the prosecutrix voluntarily accompanied him and that physical relations were consensual, as evidenced by her statements during the investigation.

It noted that the prosecutrix did not allege force or non-consensual intercourse.

The court also took into account that the FIR was registered based on suspicion and the prosecutrix's age rather than direct initial allegations against the applicant.

Crucially, the investigation was complete, a charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicant had been in judicial custody since January 5, 2026.

The court recognized that the trial would likely take a considerable time to conclude, making prolonged pre-trial detention against the concept of liberty.

These factors, along with the applicant's status as a permanent resident of District Guna, mitigated concerns about him absconding.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court.

The bail was subject to several conditions, including cooperation in investigation/trial, not inducing or threatening witnesses, not committing any other offense, not seeking unnecessary adjournments, and not leaving India without permission.