MCRC/6989/2026 of SAGAR YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 6 September 2026

1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 303/2025 registered at Police Station – Nandani Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 83, 64(2)(M) and 65(1) of B.N.S. 2023, and also under Sections 5(L) & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH

2. As per prosecution case, father of the victim lodged the missing report of the victim on 24.11.2025, who was aged about 13 years 5 months. Crime was registered against the unknown person. During the course of investigation Police recovered the victim from the possession of the applicant in under construction house from Pune (Maharashtra). Statement of the victim was recorded and applicant was arrested on 09.12.2025. Hence, this application.

3. Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question. Applicant is aged about 19 years and has no criminal antecedent. She would also submit that there is no allegation made against the applicant with regard to sexual assault by the victim in her statement. She would further submit that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 09.12.2025, hence, application may be allowed and the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that looking to the gravity of offence, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. However, during the course of argument, on being questioned with regard to allegation levelled upon the applicant, he submits that it appears that no allegation has been made by the victim against the applicant about sexual assault in her statement.

5. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim along with her father appeared present before this Court through virtual mode from DLSA, Durg. They submitted that they are having no objection in granting bail to applicant.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submission made herein above.

7. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, also the fact that victim and her father have no objection in granting bail to the applicant and further considering the detention period of the applicant who is in jail since 09.12.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu)

Judge Ankit