‘Parties Were Well Acquainted’: Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Raping, Extorting And Intimidating Municipal Chairperson Using Obscene Photographs And Videos
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Single Bench of Justice Devnarayan Mishra has granted bail to a man accused of raping, extorting, and criminally intimidating an elected Chairperson of the Municipality by allegedly using her obscene photographs and videos. The Court noted that both individuals were well acquainted and, without commenting on the merits of the allegations, directed his release on a personal bond with strict conditions to refrain from influencing the victim or witnesses, ensure regular personal attendance before the trial court, and avoid any repetition of the offence during the pendency of the trial.
The case arose from a complaint filed at Police Station Kotwali, District Sidhi, alleging that the applicant had blackmailed, sexually assaulted, and extorted money from an elected Chairperson of a municipality by using her photographs and obscene videos. The First Information Report was registered for offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 308(5), 296, and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant had been in custody since January 13, 2025, and had earlier withdrawn two bail applications.
The defence submitted that the applicant and the complainant were in a consensual relationship, and that the criminal case was filed under pressure from the complainant’s husband, who had earlier initiated divorce proceedings alleging adultery but later withdrew them. The defence further relied on telephonic conversations, photographs, and statements suggesting that money involved was borrowed by a relative and not extorted. The prosecution opposed bail, asserting that the applicant had blackmailed the complainant, received money through such means, and stored explicit photos and videos on his mobile phone. The case diary, statements, and forensic report were placed before the Court for consideration under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The Court recorded that it had “heard the parties and perused the case diary.” It noted from the material placed that “the parties were well acquainted with each other.” Referring to the submissions of the applicant, the Court stated that “learned counsel for the applicant has produced some material before this Court in a sealed cover envelope, copies whereof have already been supplied to learned Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the respondent/complainant.”
The Court took note of the contention that “from the contents of petition filed by the victim’s husband and telephonic conversations made between the applicant and victim, it is clear that the victim’s husband was making pressure upon her to lodge an FIR against the applicant.”
It further recorded that “from the statement of Ramdulare Chaturvedi, it is clear that no money has been deposited in the applicant’s bank account,” and that “the theory of blackmailing is false and frivolous.”
The Court also noted the prosecution’s submission that “from the report of FSL annexed with the charge-sheet, it is clear that some photos of victim and her obscene videos were recovered from the mobile phone of the applicant,” and that the accused “by blackmailing the victim, had taken money and by that, he has purchased a car.”
The Court stated: “Considering the facts and circumstances brought on record and on going through the material placed by learned counsel for the applicant, it is clear that the parties were well acquainted with each other. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed with the following conditions:-”
“That the applicant shall not induce or threat the victim, her family members and any prosecution witness in any manner whatsoever. That on each and every date of hearing, the applicant shall personally present before the trial Court concerned without any fail not through his counsel except in the unavoidable circumstances. In case of physical illness, that shall be supported in a certificate of Government Hospital and shall be produced before the trial Court concerned.”
“In future, the applicant shall not repeat the offence. If within a year, any criminal case is registered against the applicant for any substantial offence, then this order shall automatically cease its effect and in that circumstances, the trial Court shall be at liberty to take the applicant into custody without referring to this Court.”
“It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during pendency of trial.”
“In addition to above, it is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 480(3) of BNSS. Accordingly, Misc. Criminal Case stands disposed of.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: Shri Alok Vagrecha, Advocate
For the Respondents: Shri C.K. Mishra, Government Advocate for the State; Shri Pushpendra Kumar Dubey, Advocate for the complainant
Case Title: Ajeet Pal Singh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-JBP:53594
Case Number: Misc. Criminal Case No. 44293 of 2025
Bench: Justice Devnarayan Mishra
