Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/5429/2026 of DEEPAK KUMAR DHRUV, Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, on 21 July 2026
2026:CGHC:31201 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5429 of 2026 Deepak Kumar Dhruv, S/o- Tilak Ram Dhruv, Aged About 19 Years R/o- Village - Tanwarbahara, Police Station And District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station
CGHC010221682026
2026:CGHC:31201
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 5429 of 2026
Deepak Kumar Dhruv, S/o- Tilak Ram Dhruv, Aged About 19 Years R/o- Village - Tanwarbahara, Police Station And District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Panduka, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant
: Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State
: Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer.
(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL)
Order on Board
22/07/2026
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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the B.N.S.S.) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.16/2026 registered at Police Station – Panduka Distt. Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 87 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the B.N.S.) and Sections 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the POCSO Act).
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the present applicant is alleged to have established sexual relationship with the prosecutrix on the false pretext of marriage and on this, mother of the prosecutrix has lodged a written report against the applicant at P.S. Panduka and based on this, F.I.R. was registered against the applicant for the offence under the above sections.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence and as per the statement of the victim (P.W.1), she was 20 years of age and the accused/applicant has not committed any offence nor has established physical relationship with her. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 18.02.2026. He next submits that the trial is going on and completion of trial may take some considerable time. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
5. With the aid of Taluka S.L.A., Gariyaband, the victim and her mother are present and the victim raised no objection.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the statement of the victim and that, the victim has not raised any objection for grant of bail to the applicant and the trial is likely to take considerable time, without further commenting anything on merits of the matter, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for information. Sd/-
(Radhakishan Agrawal)
JUDGE Anjani