Kailash vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

This is the the first application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by the applicant for grant of bail. He has been arrested on 11.11.2025 in connection with Crime No.148 of 2025 registered at Police Station Chirula, District Datia for offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 87 of BNS.

As per prosecution story, on 19.10.2025 at about 8:00 a.m., the complainant, a resident of Village Dera Gandhari, left her house along with her husband to work as a labourer. At that time, her daughter, the prosecutrix, aged about 16 years and 6 months, was present at home. When the complainant returned home at about 6:00 p.m., she found that her daughter/prosecutrix was not present in the house. Despite making efforts to search for her, the prosecutrix could not be traced. Subsequently, on 10.11.2025, the prosecutrix was recovered from the custody/possession of Kailash Kevat (present applicant) from Village Jamodi.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that, as per the prosecutrix’s own statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the applicant was not involved in taking her from her parental home, nor did he induce, abduct, or coerce her at any point of time. The prosecutrix herself stated that after being left alone by a third person, namely Anil, she voluntarily went to the house of the applicant at Village Jamodi. It is further evident from the statement of the prosecutrix that the conduct of the applicant is wholly bonafide and he immediately informed the parents of the prosecutrix and called them to his house. More importantly, the applicant requested the parents and relatives to take their daughter back with them, but despite the same, they themselves left the prosecutrix at the applicant’s house and returned. The prosecutrix thereafter stayed at the applicant’s house for about 20–25 days with the knowledge and implied consent of her parents and relatives, which clearly negates any allegation of wrongful confinement, abduction, or criminal intent on the part of the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.11.2025. Conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable time. There is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection looking to the nature and gravity of offence.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, without commenting on merits of the case, this bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one local solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the concerned Court, subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically, without further reference to the Bench;

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.