The Madhya Pradesh High Court has struck down the state's system under which certain newly appointed government employees were paid 70%, 80% and 90% of the minimum pay scale during the first three years of probation.

The court has held that employees performing the duties attached to their posts cannot be denied the applicable minimum pay merely because they are on probation. The ruling reinforces the principle of “equal pay for equal work” in cases covered by the litigation.

What was the 70-80-90% system?

Under a General Administration Department memorandum issued in December 2019, certain employees recruited to posts outside the MPPSC examination system were placed on a three-year probationary pay structure.

They were paid:

• 70% of the minimum pay scale in the first year
• 80% in the second year
• 90% in the third year

Full salary became payable after the applicable probationary period.

The arrangement had been challenged by employees before the High Court.

Court finds unequal treatment

The court's reasoning centred on the fact that employees appointed through proper recruitment procedures were performing the duties attached to their posts.

The judgment held that there was no reasonable basis for creating different classes of probationers and paying some employees less despite them performing the same work.

The court relied on earlier decisions in which the 70-80-90% arrangement had been rejected.

Arrears also become important

The ruling has financial implications for employees who received reduced pay during probation.

In one recent order, the High Court directed that employees who had not received full salary during probation should be paid the difference. In another case, the court directed payment of the three-year salary difference within 60 days.

This means affected employees may become eligible for arrears, subject to the precise applicability of the relevant judgment and their individual service circumstances.

Earlier cases had challenged the policy

The issue has been repeatedly litigated before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

In July 2026, the court again relied on its earlier decision in the Vinita Tiwari case, holding that employees were entitled to the minimum applicable pay scale rather than the reduced 70%, 80% and 90% payments.

Similar orders have subsequently been passed in several individual cases.

What employees should understand

The ruling is significant for government employees appointed under the rules covered by the litigation. However, it should not automatically be interpreted as meaning that every probationer in every government department will receive an identical arrears payment.

The applicability of the judgment depends on the employee's recruitment route, appointment conditions, department and the specific court order governing the case.

A Raipur court has acquitted gangster Aman Sahu and six other accused in a case related to an alleged conspiracy to commit robbery and extortion, citing the prosecution's failure to establish the charges during trial. The judgment was delivered on August 18, 2026, by the Third Additional District and Sessions Court in Raipur, according to the case information provided. Sahu had died in a police encounter in Jharkhand about 18 months earlier, but his name remained part of the criminal case registered at Ganj police station. The other accused were Rohit Swarnkar, Mukesh Kumar, Devendra Singh, Rajber Singh, Pappu Singh alias Papsa and Sunil Kumar alias Sunil Kumar Meena alias Mayank Singh.

The case was registered under IPC Sections 399, 402, 386 and 120-B. According to the prosecution's earlier account, Raipur Police had arrested four people in May 2024 on allegations that they were preparing to carry out a major criminal operation in the city and were connected to the Aman Sahu gang. Police had also linked the alleged planning to Mayank Singh, who was accused at the time of operating the gang from abroad. Rohit Swarnkar was reportedly arrested with a pistol and magazine, while Rajber Singh Chawla was later arrested in Madhya Pradesh in connection with the alleged supply of the weapon. The case also involved provisions of the Arms Act.

Prosecution Failed to Prove Charges

According to defence lawyer Dipankar Banerjee, the prosecution was unable to establish the alleged conspiracy, possession or role of the accused with sufficient evidence during the trial. Questions were also raised over the identity of the person whom police had linked to the case as Mayank Singh. The defence argued that the prosecution could not conclusively establish that the person identified in the investigation as Mayank Singh was the same person as Sunil Kumar Meena. The defence further maintained that the alleged recovery of weapons did not establish the charges against the accused to the required standard.

The court ultimately acquitted all seven accused. The case record reportedly carries the status “contested-acquitted”. However, the detailed judgment or order copy had not been uploaded on the court website at the time of the supplied report. Therefore, the precise reasoning adopted by the court and the evidence it found insufficient can be established in full only after the detailed order becomes available. The acquittal in this particular case does not mean that allegations in other criminal cases involving the accused have been judicially disproved.

Aman Sahu Died in 2025

Aman Sahu had been arrested in connection with cases in Raipur and was later taken to Jharkhand by police in March 2025. During the journey, he was killed in a police encounter in Palamu. Police had then claimed that Sahu attempted to escape and was killed during the ensuing exchange of fire. His death brought an end to the possibility of a trial against him personally, but the proceedings in the Raipur case continued in relation to the remaining accused and the legal record associated with the case.

The Ganj police case was initially heard from September 2024 and was subsequently transferred to the court that conducted the trial. The August 18 judgment now closes the case with the acquittal of all seven accused. With the detailed order still awaited, the available information indicates that the prosecution could not prove the alleged robbery and extortion conspiracy beyond the required legal standard. The development is significant because the case was among those in which Raipur Police had alleged links to the wider Aman Sahu gang network.

Three brothers from Damoh have been acquitted by the High Court after spending nearly 17 years facing a murder conviction and life imprisonment in a 2009 case.

The case relates to the death of Pyarelal in the Madiyado area of Damoh district. The trial court had convicted Tulsiram, Mohanlal and Harprasad and sentenced them to life imprisonment in 2012.

During the appeal, the High Court found significant shortcomings in the police investigation and contradictions in the prosecution evidence. The court subsequently set aside the conviction and acquitted the accused.

For the family, however, the legal battle came at a heavy financial cost. They said they had to sell around six acres of agricultural land and their house to meet legal expenses. They also claimed that their children's education was disrupted because of the family's deteriorating financial condition.

Dispute Preceded Pyarelal's Death

According to Tulsiram Rajpal, a dispute broke out between Pyarelal and his son Ghanshyam on the night of August 25, 2009.

The family claims that during the argument, Ghanshyam attacked his father with a knife. Pyarelal later died while undergoing treatment.

Tulsiram alleged that after the incident, members of Pyarelal's family accused him and his two brothers of the murder. The brothers maintained that they were at home when the incident took place.

Despite their claim, police arrested the three brothers as accused in the case.

Family Alleges Custodial Assault

Tulsiram said he was around 16 years old when the incident occurred. He alleged that police treated him as an adult and assaulted him during questioning.

According to the family, the three brothers were kept at the police station for several days before being produced before the court and sent to jail.

On June 29, 2012, the Damoh trial court convicted the three brothers of murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment.

The family then approached the High Court challenging the conviction.

Legal Battle Continued for Years

The brothers' family members, including Babulal, Haricharan and Nandlal, who were working in Delhi at the time of the incident, returned to Damoh after learning about the case and began pursuing the legal proceedings.

Advocate Ajay Kumar Jain represented the accused during the appeal.

Harprasad was granted bail by the High Court in 2014. However, his legal battle did not end there. The family said he later died after being struck by lightning while working in the fields.

Tulsiram was also subsequently granted bail as the proceedings continued.

High Court Finds Evidence Insufficient

During the appeal, the High Court examined the investigation and evidence presented by the prosecution.

According to the family's lawyer, the proceedings revealed shortcomings in the police investigation and contradictions in the evidence. The prosecution was unable to establish the charges to the required legal standard.

The High Court therefore set aside the life sentences and acquitted the accused.

The family has now sought action against the police personnel involved in the original investigation, alleging serious lapses in the handling of the case.

Family Says Land and House Were Sold

Tulsiram said the prolonged legal proceedings severely affected the family's financial condition.

According to him, a significant portion of their six-acre agricultural holding had to be sold to finance the case. The family also sold its house in the village.

He said the family had previously depended on farming but now has to combine agricultural work with wage labour in Delhi to make ends meet.

The family's financial difficulties also affected the education of the children, according to relatives.

Mother Says Family Kept Faith

Tulsiram's mother, Lakshmibai, said she had maintained that her sons were not responsible for Pyarelal's death.

She recalled that Tulsiram and Mohan were inside the house while Harprasad was sitting in the courtyard when the incident occurred, according to her account.

Lakshmibai said the family continued to have faith in the legal system despite the case continuing for years.

Lawyer Points to Investigation Lapses

Advocate Ajay Kumar Jain said the three brothers had been accused of murdering their neighbour Pyarelal.

He said the appeal focused on weaknesses in the investigation and inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence. After examining these issues, the High Court concluded that the conviction could not be sustained.

The acquittal brings an end to a legal battle that lasted nearly 17 years, although the family says the financial and personal consequences of the case will remain long after the court proceedings have ended.

Anger erupted outside a court in Chhattisgarh’s Dhamtari on Wednesday after five men were sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of three friends in a case that shocked the district.

Relatives of the victims expressed disappointment with the court’s decision and demanded the death penalty for the convicts. As the accused were being taken out of the court premises, some family members threw shoes, slippers and stones at them, shouting, “What did you gain by destroying our families?”

The court had sentenced all five adult accused to life imprisonment in the triple-murder case.

Families Demand Death Penalty

The victims’ relatives said the three men had left behind young children and argued that life imprisonment was not sufficient punishment.

One relative became emotional while recalling a young daughter of one of the victims, saying the child still looks towards the door expecting her father to return with chocolates.

The families said they were unhappy with the sentence and would consider challenging the verdict in a higher court.

Police personnel maintained security outside the court as the convicts were taken away in a prison vehicle.

Three Friends Killed After Dispute

The incident took place near Annapurna Dhaba in Bhoyna village under the Arjuni police station area of Dhamtari on the night of August 11, 2025.

According to the prosecution case, five young men travelling in a car had gone out in Dhamtari and stopped near the dhaba to ask about something.

Eight people were already at the dhaba and were reportedly involved in an argument over payment of a bill. The group was allegedly damaging chairs at the establishment.

When the five youths got out of their car, an argument broke out between the two groups. The dispute escalated into verbal abuse and then a physical confrontation.

Knife Attack Killed Three

During the altercation, the main accused, Gopi Diwan, allegedly attacked three of the youths with a knife.

The victims were identified as Alok Singh Thakur, Nitin Tandi and Suresh Nihal.

All three died at the scene from injuries sustained in the attack. The injured victims were taken to hospital after the incident, while police launched an investigation into the killings.

The case subsequently became known as the Dhamtari triple-murder case.

Five Adults Among Eight Accused

Police arrested the accused following the investigation. The case involved five adult accused and three juveniles.

Public prosecutor Geetesh Prajapati said the five adult accused had been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the triple murder.

Additional sentences were also imposed for other offences. The accused received two years for rioting, five years for illegal possession of weapons and six months for assaulting others.

Gopi Diwan, Kuleshwar Netam and Ranveer Sahu were separately sentenced in the weapons-related case.

The prosecutor said sentences of up to three years would run concurrently.

Verdict Delivered Within a Year

The prosecution said the case was decided within roughly a year.

The charge sheet was submitted before the court on November 11, while the verdict was pronounced on August 12, 2026.

The prosecution had sought the death penalty for the accused, while the victims’ families had also demanded capital punishment.

However, the court awarded life imprisonment to the five adult accused.

The verdict was delivered by First Additional Sessions Judge Mohan Singh Korram.

Families May Challenge Verdict

The victims’ families have indicated that they are considering an appeal against the sentence.

Their reaction outside the court reflected the anger and grief that has continued since the three young men were killed.

The case had also drawn attention because of the circumstances surrounding the victims’ deaths and the impact on their families, including young children who lost their fathers.

With the five accused sentenced to life imprisonment, the next legal step could now come from the victims’ families if they decide to challenge the punishment before a higher court.

 A court in Madhya Pradesh's Ratlam has sentenced a woman to double life imprisonment for murdering her four-month-old twin children by drowning them in a water storage tank, while her husband has been awarded three years' rigorous imprisonment for concealing evidence by burying the bodies without informing the police.

The verdict was delivered by Eighth Additional District and Sessions Judge Nirmal Mandoriya, nearly one-and-a-half years after the shocking incident that had drawn widespread public attention.

Twins Found Dead in Water Tank

According to the prosecution, the incident took place on November 20, 2024, at a rented house in Ratlam's Ved Vyas Colony. Landlord Irshad Qureshi informed police after neighbours reported that tenant Pummy alias Muskan had raised an alarm claiming her infant twins, Hasan and Fatima, had fallen into a water storage tank.

Residents rushed to the house and found both four-month-old children inside the Sintex water tank. Their father, Aamir Qureshi, was not at home when the incident occurred. By the time the children were pulled out, both had died.

Bodies Buried Without Informing Police

Instead of reporting the deaths to police, Aamir allegedly took the bodies with the help of a friend and buried them at a local cemetery. After receiving information about the suspicious deaths, Manak Chowk police registered a case of unnatural death.

The following day, authorities exhumed the bodies and conducted post-mortem examinations, which confirmed that both infants had died due to drowning.

Investigation Pointed to Mother

During the investigation, police recreated the incident using a baby doll and examined whether the children could have accidentally fallen into the tank. Investigators concluded that the deaths were not accidental.

According to the prosecution, Muskan became angry after her husband and mother-in-law ignored her request not to leave for a family funeral. She had reportedly expressed concern that she would be unable to manage both infants alone.

Police alleged that, in a fit of anger, she deliberately drowned one child in the water tank before repeating the act with the second infant. She later informed her husband over the phone that the children were missing.

Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence

Additional Public Prosecutor Sanjeev Singh Chauhan told the court that although 16 of the 24 prosecution witnesses turned hostile, the chain of circumstantial evidence, forensic findings and investigation established the mother's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The court convicted Muskan of murdering both children and sentenced her to two life terms, along with a fine of ₹10,000.

Her husband, Aamir Qureshi, was convicted for destroying evidence after secretly burying the bodies without informing law enforcement. He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment and fined ₹2,000.

The judgment brings closure to one of Ratlam's most disturbing child murder cases, where investigators relied heavily on forensic evidence and circumstantial proof after several witnesses retracted their statements during trial.

The judgment was delivered by the Court of the Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, which held the accused guilty of murder after examining eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence and other material presented during the trial.

The case dates back to January 28, 2024, when Chakradhar Nagar police received information that a man had been found dead near the main road in Navapali village. The victim, identified as Vishal Singh Thakur, had suffered multiple fatal injuries to his head and neck caused by a sharp-edged weapon.

Police reached the spot, registered a case and began an investigation. During the preliminary inquiry, investigators inspected the crime scene, collected physical evidence and recorded statements from eyewitnesses.

According to the prosecution, Vishal Singh Thakur had been supervising land levelling and bush-clearing work on a disputed piece of land when an argument broke out with Harilal Khadia over the filling of soil on the property.

The dispute allegedly escalated, following which the accused attacked Vishal repeatedly with an axe, inflicting severe injuries to his head and neck. The victim died at the scene.

Investigating officers seized several articles from the crime scene, including the victim's motorcycle, blood-stained cap, spectacles, footwear and soil samples. These materials were later sent for forensic examination as part of the investigation.

Police arrested Harilal Khadia on January 29, 2024. During interrogation, the accused allegedly admitted to committing the crime. Based on his disclosure, investigators recovered the axe believed to have been used in the attack along with blood-stained clothing.

The recovered articles were forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), whose findings were presented during the trial as supporting evidence.

During court proceedings, Additional Public Prosecutor Tanmay Banerjee represented the prosecution, while the investigation was led by Inspector Prashant Rao Aher. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses and relied on documentary, forensic and scientific evidence to establish the sequence of events.

After evaluating the evidence and hearing arguments from both sides, the court concluded that the prosecution had proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

The court convicted Harilal Khadia under the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code for murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. It also imposed a fine of ₹100.

In addition to the sentence, the court recommended that the victim's family receive ₹1 lakh as compensation under the Chhattisgarh Government's Victim Compensation Scheme, recognising the impact of the crime on the deceased's dependants.

The verdict brings the trial to a close more than two years after the fatal incident and reinforces the importance of forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony in securing convictions in serious criminal cases.

The case relates to the death of a woman from the Kartala police station area who was found hanging inside her home on January 30, 2018.

While delivering the verdict, Justice N.K. Vyas observed that the victim had been subjected to continuous harassment and intimidation by the accused, leaving her with no practical alternative except to take the extreme step of ending her life. The court held that the circumstances and evidence on record established a direct link between the accused's conduct and the victim's suicide.

According to the prosecution, the woman had gone to sleep after dinner on the night of January 29, 2018. The following morning, her mother discovered her hanging from a scarf tied to a pipe inside the room.

During the investigation, police recovered a mobile phone and a suicide note. Based on the complaint lodged by the victim's mother, a case was registered against Mohammad Seraj.

Investigators later alleged that the accused was in a one-sided relationship and repeatedly pressured the woman to marry him. When she refused, he allegedly continued to pursue her, threaten her and harass both her and her family members.

Court records indicated that the alleged harassment had continued for an extended period before the woman's death.

The prosecution also presented evidence suggesting that the victim had previously attempted suicide in May 2017 by slashing her wrist. She was taken to hospital and received medical treatment. The case further revealed the emotional strain experienced by the family, with the victim's mother reportedly consuming sleeping pills due to stress arising from the situation.

According to evidence presented before the court, local village representatives and police officials had earlier attempted to intervene and counsel the accused, but the alleged harassment did not stop.

The case initially took a different turn when a sessions court in Korba acquitted the accused in January 2019.

At the time, the trial court cited insufficient evidence and noted that the handwriting in the alleged suicide note had not been verified by a handwriting expert. It also held that there was inadequate proof to establish direct instigation for suicide.

The acquittal was subsequently challenged before the High Court.

While reviewing the matter, the High Court disagreed with the reasoning adopted by the lower court. Justice Vyas observed that the trial court had failed to properly appreciate the testimony of the victim's mother and had placed undue emphasis on the absence of independent witnesses.

The High Court reiterated a long-established legal principle that the quality of evidence is more important than the quantity of witnesses.

The court further held that strong oral testimony, supported by medical evidence and the overall circumstances of the case, was sufficient to establish the accused's role. It concluded that the absence of expert handwriting verification alone could not undermine the prosecution's case when other evidence pointed towards sustained harassment.

As a result, the High Court convicted Mohammad Seraj under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with abetment of suicide.

The judgment is being viewed as an important reminder of the legal consequences of prolonged harassment, intimidation and coercive behaviour, particularly in cases involving unwanted relationships and marriage pressure.

The matter will now move to the sentencing stage.

The High Court has scheduled a hearing on July 27 to determine the quantum of punishment. The convicted individual or his legal representative has been directed to remain present before the court during the proceedings.

The final sentence will be decided after hearing arguments from both sides regarding mitigating and aggravating circumstances in the case.

Bharti, who represented the Datia Assembly constituency in Madhya Pradesh, had approached the High Court seeking relief from the conviction and sentence awarded by the lower court. However, after hearing the matter, the court declined to interfere with the earlier judgment and upheld the findings against him.

The case relates to allegations of bank fraud, for which a trial court had previously convicted Bharti and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment. Following the conviction, he faced disqualification from the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly under provisions governing the eligibility of elected representatives.

The High Court's decision is significant because a conviction carrying a sentence of two years or more can result in the disqualification of a legislator under existing legal provisions. Bharti had hoped that relief from the appellate court could strengthen his legal position regarding the consequences arising from the conviction.

Legal experts note that appellate courts generally examine whether there were procedural lapses, errors in the appreciation of evidence or other grounds warranting interference with a lower court's judgment. In this case, the High Court found no reason to overturn the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

The ruling marks another important development in a case that has attracted political attention in Madhya Pradesh due to Bharti’s status as a former legislator. The verdict is also likely to have implications for any future legal remedies he may choose to pursue.

While the High Court has upheld the conviction, Bharti still has the option of approaching the Supreme Court if he wishes to challenge the judgment further. Any such move would depend on the legal strategy adopted by his counsel in the coming days.

The decision comes amid increasing judicial scrutiny of financial fraud and corruption-related cases, with courts consistently emphasising accountability and adherence to banking and financial regulations.

For now, the Delhi High Court’s order ensures that the trial court’s three-year sentence remains in force, dealing a significant blow to the former Congress leader’s efforts to secure relief in the matter.

Authorities in Madhya Pradesh have intensified security arrangements ahead of the expected verdict in the long-pending Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute in Dhar. The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court is likely to pronounce its decision on Friday after hearings on multiple petitions and intervention applications concluded earlier this month.

The development has become one of the biggest India News Update stories in the state because of the religious sensitivity associated with the Bhojshala complex. Administration officials in both Dhar and Indore districts have been placed on high alert, while police and reserve forces have been deployed in large numbers to maintain law and order. Dhar Collector Rajeev Ranjan Meena and Superintendent of Police Sachin Sharma visited the Bhojshala premises early Friday to review security arrangements. Officials inspected deployment points and monitored the situation inside and outside the disputed complex before leaving the area.

Police personnel have been stationed across the Bhojshala premises and surrounding localities. Authorities said special precautions were necessary because Friday coincides with Jumma prayers traditionally offered by members of the Muslim community at the site under the existing arrangement. Officials confirmed that nearly 1,200 police personnel from across the district have been deployed for security duty. Dhar city has reportedly been divided into 12 security layers to ensure complete monitoring of sensitive areas and quick response in case of any disturbance.

Senior police officials reviewed preparations at the district control room and instructed security teams to remain vigilant throughout the day. Reserve police forces and Rapid Action Force personnel have also been kept on standby. The administration appealed to residents of all communities to maintain peace and avoid spreading rumours or unverified information. Authorities said strict monitoring of social media platforms is underway and legal action would be taken against anyone found posting inflammatory or misleading content.

Meanwhile, members associated with Hindu organisations gathered near the Bhojshala premises and recited Hanuman Chalisa at nearby temples. Officials maintained close surveillance to ensure that religious activities remained peaceful and within permitted limits. The Bhojshala dispute has remained one of the most sensitive religious and legal issues in Madhya Pradesh for several years. The latest legal proceedings began in 2022 when petitioner Ranjana Agnihotri and others, representing Hindu Front for Justice, approached the High Court seeking declaration of the site’s religious character and full rights for Hindu worship.

The petition demanded uninterrupted पूजा and regular worship rights for Hindus at the Bhojshala complex. It also sought restrictions on namaz within the premises, formation of a trust for management of the site and the return of the idol of Goddess Vagdevi currently housed in the British Museum.

During the hearing, the Hindu side argued that Bhojshala is an ancient temple of Goddess Saraswati and historically functioned as a centre of learning during the rule of Paramara king Bhoj. Advocates referred to ASI survey findings, inscriptions, architectural remains and historical literature to support their claims.

Advocate Manish Gupta reportedly cited references from the ancient text Samarangana Sutradhara and argued that the structure matched traditional temple architecture described during King Bhoj’s era.

On the other hand, the Muslim side maintained before the court that the site has long functioned as Kamal Maula Mosque and argued that questions regarding religious character should be decided by a civil court. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid also raised objections regarding the clarity and interpretation of the Archaeological Survey of India’s scientific survey findings.

The ASI had conducted a 98-day scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex in 2024 following court directions. The findings later became a major point of discussion during arguments before the High Court. Earlier this year, on January 23, 2026, the Supreme Court permitted uninterrupted worship at Bhojshala throughout Vasant Panchami celebrations. Following this, regular hearings in the High Court continued from April 6 until May 12, after which the verdict was reserved.

The dispute has witnessed several tense moments over the years, especially when Vasant Panchami and Friday prayers coincided on the same day. Similar situations in 2013 and 2016 had led to heightened tension and heavy security deployment in Dhar. Under the current administrative arrangement in place since 2003, Hindus are permitted to offer prayers every Tuesday and on Vasant Panchami, while the Muslim community is allowed to offer Friday namaz at the complex. The site remains open to tourists on other days.

---------

A special POCSO court in Chhattisgarh’s Raigarh district has sentenced a 24-year-old man to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for abducting and repeatedly sexually assaulting a minor girl. The judgment was delivered by Special Judge Devendra Sahu after the court found the accused guilty under provisions related to rape and offences against children. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 6,000 on the convict. Officials said additional imprisonment would apply if the fine is not paid. The case was registered under the Kotra Road police station area and had drawn attention due to the manner in which the accused allegedly lured the victim.

Minor Went Missing From Home

According to prosecution records, the incident began on May 28, 2025, when the 16-year-old victim was staying at home with her grandmother while her parents had gone to attend the funeral of a relative. Police said the girl left home around 11:30 am after informing her grandmother that she was going to a nearby shop. However, she did not return, following which family members began searching for her. After repeated attempts failed, the family approached police authorities and a kidnapping case was registered. Investigators later launched a detailed search operation to trace the missing teenager.

Friendship Started Through Mobile

During investigation, police found that the accused, identified as Karan Dom, a resident of Patratoli in Jashpur district, had allegedly come into contact with the victim through a mobile phone conversation in 2024. Officials stated that the accused used an unknown number to communicate with the girl and gradually developed contact with her over time. According to the prosecution, the accused allegedly trapped the minor in a relationship by promising marriage and later convinced her to meet him outside her hometown.

Taken to Odisha and Kunkuri

Police investigation revealed that the accused first called the victim to Gerwani and then allegedly took her by bus to Kunkuri before travelling to Puri in Odisha. Prosecution officials told the court that the accused kept the girl confined in a house in Puri and repeatedly sexually assaulted her over a period of nearly five days. After staying in Odisha, the accused reportedly brought the victim back to Kunkuri in Chhattisgarh. The court observed that the victim was a minor and incapable of legally consenting to such acts.

Family Informed by Relative

According to the case details, on July 3, 2025, the accused and the victim reportedly reached the residence of the accused’s maternal uncle in Telain village. Police said the accused’s uncle later contacted the victim’s family and informed them about her whereabouts. Following the information, police teams immediately reached the location the next day and rescued the victim. Authorities simultaneously arrested the accused and initiated legal proceedings under the POCSO Act and other relevant sections of law.

Court Calls It Serious Crime

During the hearing, the special POCSO court observed that the accused knowingly abducted a minor girl and exploited her despite being aware of her age. The court noted that the accused not only misled the victim by promising marriage but also violated her dignity and personal safety through repeated sexual assault. Special Judge Devendra Sahu termed the offence serious in nature and held the accused guilty based on witness statements, evidence collected during investigation, and medical findings presented before the court.

Rigorous Punishment Awarded

The court sentenced the accused to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and also imposed a monetary penalty. Officials said the prosecution strongly argued the case and sought strict punishment considering the gravity of the offence and the age of the victim. The trial was conducted by Special Public Prosecutor Govind Narayan Dubey on behalf of the state government. Legal experts said the judgment reflects the strict approach adopted by courts in cases involving crimes against minors under the POCSO Act.

Police and Legal Action Praised

Authorities stated that coordinated efforts between investigators and prosecutors helped secure conviction in the case. Police officials said timely tracing of the victim and evidence collection played an important role during trial proceedings. The case has once again highlighted concerns related to online contact, grooming through mobile communication, and exploitation of minors through false promises. Officials appealed to parents and guardians to remain alert regarding unknown contacts and suspicious communication involving children and teenagers.

---------------

The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the acquittal of a man accused of rape and cheating, ruling that no offence of deception is made out when a woman knowingly enters into a relationship with a married man. In a significant ruling, the court observed that if a woman is aware that her partner is already married, she cannot later allege that physical relations were established on the false promise of marriage.

Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal passed the order while dismissing the woman’s appeal against a lower court judgment that had acquitted the accused, Mahesh Ganjir. The Chhattisgarh High Court said the essential element of fraud was absent in the case, as the complainant was fully aware of the man’s marital status.

What The Case Was

The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman from Dongargarh in Chhattisgarh, who claimed that she had married Mahesh Ganjir on May 8, 2008. She told the court that a written marriage agreement was also executed on January 21, 2009, and that the two lived together as husband and wife after that.

The woman alleged that the accused had physical relations with her during the course of the relationship and later expelled her from his house after she refused to give him more money. She also claimed to have spent Rs 85,000 on travel and related expenses during their time together.

Based on these claims, she accused Ganjir of rape and cheating and challenged the trial court’s acquittal before the High Court.

Contradictions In Record

The Chhattisgarh High Court noted several contradictions in the woman’s claims and found material inconsistencies in her earlier statements. According to court records, her earlier legal notices and police complaint did not mention a fixed marriage date. Instead, they stated that the accused had physical relations with her between May and September 2008 on the assurance of marriage.

The court also relied on another notice issued by the complainant, which indicated that she was fully aware that Mahesh Ganjir was already married. Records showed that she even knew the name of his first wife.

This, the court said, weakened her claim that she had been deceived into believing she was entering a legally valid marriage.

Court’s Legal Reasoning

While examining the matter, the Chhattisgarh High Court referred to Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage.

The court said the core requirement under the provision is deception. It held that where both parties are aware that no valid legal marriage exists, the question of fraud does not arise.

Justice Agrawal noted that the accused’s first wife was alive at the time of the alleged marriage, making any subsequent marriage legally void under Sections 5 and 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Since the complainant knew this fact, the court held that she could not later claim she had been misled into believing she was the accused’s legally wedded wife.

Woman Argued Case

The woman argued her own case before the High Court after challenging the trial court verdict. After hearing her submissions and reviewing the trial record, the court found no legal ground to interfere with the acquittal.

The High Court then dismissed the appeal and affirmed the lower court’s order in favour of the accused.

Legal Significance Explained

The ruling is significant in cases involving allegations of rape on the promise of marriage, especially where prior knowledge of an existing marriage is established. Legal experts say the judgment reinforces the principle that consent obtained in a relationship cannot automatically be treated as consent obtained by fraud unless clear deception is proved.

The Chhattisgarh High Court ruling is likely to be cited in similar cases involving disputes over consent, marital status and allegations of inducement, according to officials tracking recent India News Update and Government Updates in criminal law.