Madhya Pradesh High Court
Fulesh Singh Chawda vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 March, 2026
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
Bench: Subodh Abhyankar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:8356
1 MCRC-9217-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
ON THE 9 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9217 of 2026
FULESH SINGH CHAWDA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Kalrav Patel - Advocate for the applicant through V.C.
Shri Hemant Sharma - G.A. for State.
ORDER
1] They are heard. Perused the case-diary.
2] This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of
the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 438 of Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his
arrest in connection with Crime No.0366/2025 registered at Police Station
Sitamau, District Mandsaur for the offence punishable under Sections 376,
509, 506, 354-D & 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 66-E &
67 of I.T. Act.
3] The allegation against the applicant is of rape and blackmail.
4] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the case, as the prosecutrix was having an affair with
him, their photographs together have also been filed on record. It is also
submitted that the applicant has also gifted her jewellery, worth Rs.22,800/-,
documents regarding which have also been filed on record. Thus, it is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PANKAJ
PANDEY
Signing time: 3/28/2026
5:46:43 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:8356
2 MCRC-9217-2026
submitted the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary and
the anticipatory bail application be allowed.
5] Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the
prayer.
6] Having considered the rival submissions, and on perusal of the case
diary, it is found that the date of incident is stated to be 01.03.2021 to
01.04.2021, whereas the FIR has been lodged on 07.06.2025, and in the FIR
it is also mentioned that the applicant has also sent various nude photographs
of the prosecutrix to her brother-in-law and sister-in-law (Jeth and Jethani).
In such circumstances, even if the prosecutrix was a consenting party
initially, but considering the applicant’s conduct subsequently and looking to
the incriminating WhatsApp chats and the photographs, this Court does not
find it to be a fit case where the facility of anticipatory bail can be granted to
the applicant, as his custodial interrogation would be necessary.
7] Accordingly, the application is hereby dismissed.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)
JUDGE
Pankaj
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PANKAJ
PANDEY
Signing time: 3/28/2026
5:46:43 PM
