Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/5560/2026 of PRANJAL TIRKEY @ SHANI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 27 July 2026
2026:CGHC:32226 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5560 of 2026 Pranjal Tirkey @ Shani S/o Pramod Tirkey Aged About 25 Years R/o Lefri, Police Chowki Ranhat, Police Station Chalgali District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through
CGHC010214522026
2026:CGHC:32226
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 5560 of 2026
Pranjal Tirkey @ Shani S/o Pramod Tirkey Aged About 25 Years R/o Lefri, Police Chowki Ranhat, Police Station Chalgali District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)
---- Respondent
(Cause title is taken from the CIS)
___________________________________________________________
For Applicant : Mr. Rajnish Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate For State-Respondent : Mr. Hrishikesh Sharma, PL
___________________________________________________________
Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 28/07/2026
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 bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.25/2026, registered at Police Station- Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64, 3(5) of BNS
and Sections 4 & 17 of POCSO Act.
2. The prosecution case is that the prosecutrix went missing on 03.02.2026, following which her mother lodged a missing report on 04.02.2026. After recovery, the prosecutrix alleged that the applicant had taken her and her friend in a car to his village, where the applicant and his brother Lalu @ Akash allegedly committed rape upon them and later left them at the house of co-accused Pintu @ Rakesh. On the basis of her statement, the FIR was registered, investigation was completed, and the charge-sheet was filed against the applicant and he was arrested on 20.02.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the said case. He further contended that the applicant and the prosecutrix are acquainted with each other very well and there was love affair between them. He further contended that the prosecutrix was willing and consenting party and charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 20.02.2026, and the trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that at the time of incident, age of the victim was 16 years and 02 months and the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the minor victim, therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail.
5. Despite service of notice to the victim, none appeared on her behalf.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the material available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for information. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Vasant