Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRCA/1270/2026 of ADITYA PRATAP KASHYAP Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 9 September 2026
2026:CGHC:39752 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1270 of 2026 Aditya Pratap Kashyap S/o Sharad Kumar Kashyap Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 08 Chandrapur, P.S. - Chandrapur, Distt.- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Sho,
CGHC010279612026
2026:CGHC:39752
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 1270 of 2026
Aditya Pratap Kashyap S/o Sharad Kumar Kashyap Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 08 Chandrapur, P.S. - Chandrapur, Distt.- Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Sho, Police Station - Chandrapur, Distt.- Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent
For Applicant
:
Ms. Richa Patel, Advocate
For Respondent-State :
Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD
10/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This is the first anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail, as the applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 51/2026 registered at Police Station – Chandrapur, District – Sakti, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Section 78 (1), 78 (2), 351 (2) of the BNS, 2023 and under Section 14 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
2. Case of the prosecution is that on 01.05.2026, victim lodged report in the concerned police station stating that prior to 01 year of the date of lodging of report, applicant used to follow her and passed vulgur comments. It is also alleged that the applicant from time to time used to beat the main door and also used to remove the net of the window. She alleged that the applicant was threatening to kill her father and also used give threat to her sister. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered against which, the applicant is aprehending his arrest.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence as alleged. She submits that only becasue he is having relationship with one of the sisters of the complainant/victim, there was exchange of words with the father of victim against which, applicant has also lodged report in the concerned police station.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent/State would oppose the submission and would submit that not only in the report/FIR, victim has also made serious allegations against the applicant in the statement recorded under Setion 183 of the B.N.S.S. 2023.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the case-diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of counsel for the respective parties as also, the allegations made by the victim in the First Information report as also, the statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, I do not find present to be a fit case to allow the application for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the application for grant of anticipatory bail is dismissed. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY