IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.704/2026)
BARKHA DINKAR APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (Arising out of SLP(Crl) No.2016/2026)
MANISHA DUBEY APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. These two appeals are directed against the judgment
dated 17.12.2025 passed by a Division Bench of the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal
No.3578/2024 to the extent that the first appellant
(Presiding Officer of the POCSO Act) as well as the second
appellant (Public Prosecutor) both have been asked to render
1
explanation on the premise that there was major lapse in
doing injustice to the accused, who was to be behind the bar
for three years “overlooking the fact that victim was a
consulting adult”. The High Court has further opined that
it’s a sign of “intellectual dishonesty on the part of the
Special Judge”.
3. The aggrieved appellants are before us.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants as well
as learned State counsel, we are satisfied that the
observations made by the High Court in paragraph nos.4, 5
and 13 of the impugned judgment are totally uncalled for and
out of context, being con...