Madhya Pradesh: Man Accused of Trying To Subject Wife to Forced Unnatural S*xual Acts Denied Anticipatory Bail by High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a Bhopal man accused of assaulting his wife and attempting unnatural s*xual acts over an INR 5 lakh dowry demand. Rejecting defense arguments about minor injuries and reporting delays, the court ruled that the gravity of the accusations made pre-arrest protection unfit.

File photo

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by a Bhopal man accused of physically assaulting his wife and attempting to subject her to forced unnatural s*xual acts over a INR 5 lakh dowry demand. Presiding over the case, Justice Rajendra Kumar Vani ruled that the gravity and serious nature of the allegations, combined with the primary evidence collected by investigators, precluded the court from granting the husband pre-arrest protection.

The decision emphasises the judiciary’s strict approach to matrimonial offences that involve elements of domestic extortion and non-consensual s*xual violence under updated criminal codes. Madhya Pradesh High Court Says Woman Cannot Seek Maintenance From Second Husband Under Section 125 CrPC if Her First Marriage Has Survived.

Criminal Accusations and Defense Arguments

The case originated from a domestic dispute in Bhopal, where the complainant alleged that her husband physically assaulted her after his demand for an INR 5 lakh dowry payment was rejected. The state prosecution further detailed that during the assault, the husband allegedly attempted to engage in forced, non-consensual unnatural s*xual acts with the victim. Representing the husband, Advocate Aryan Shukla argued that his client was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the matter. The defence contended that the allegations were manufactured, highlighting a three-day delay between the alleged incident on March 2 and the formal registration of the First Information Report (FIR) on March 5. The defence further argued that because the medical evaluation characterised the wife's physical injuries as simple in nature, custodial interrogation was unnecessary, and the court should grant the protection of anticipatory bail.

Prosecution Opposes Pre-Arrest Protection

The application was strongly opposed by both the state counsel and the legal representative of the complainant. Panel Lawyer S.M. Patel, appearing for the State, and Advocate Ashok Kumar Tiwari, representing the victim, argued that the nature of the offences was highly severe. The prosecution submitted that the case diary contained sufficient material, physical evidence, and medical reports to establish a prima facie case against the accused. They argued that extending the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail under such grave circumstances would compromise the integrity of the ongoing investigation and defeat the ends of justice.

High Court Priorities Severity Over Standard Protections

Following an evaluation of the case diary, the formal complaint, and the medical reports, Justice Vani found substantial merit in the prosecution's objections. The court noted that defences such as minor physical injuries or minor reporting delays cannot diminish the underlying severity of forced s*xual acts combined with dowry harassment. The application was formally moved under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs pre-arrest bail frameworks in the revised criminal code. "The prosecution case discloses that the applicant allegedly caused injuries to the complainant in furtherance of a demand of Rs. 5 lakh and also attempted to commit unnatural s*xual acts with the victim," the High Court bench observed in its formal order. Twisha Sharma Death Case: Father Moves MP High Court, Seeks Probe Into Legal Aid Lawyers Over Alleged Bias Towards Accused.

Concluding the ruling, Justice Vani stated, "At this stage, considering the gravity and nature of the accusations, the severity of punishment and the material collected during investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail." With the dismissal of the revision petition, the husband must pursue standard legal remedies as law enforcement continues its investigation.

Rating:3

TruLY Score 3 – Believable; Needs Further Research | On a Trust Scale of 0-5 this article has scored 3 on LatestLY, this article appears believable but may need additional verification. It is based on reporting from news websites or verified journalists (Live Law), but lacks supporting official confirmation. Readers are advised to treat the information as credible but continue to follow up for updates or confirmations

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Jun 14, 2026 11:11 AM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).

Share Now

Share Now