1 2025:CGHC:21812 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2776 of 2025 Kishan Patel S/o Late Ramnarayan Patel Aged About 27 Years R/o Rajak Mohalla, Mangla, P.S. Civil Lines District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Wasim Miyan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mrs. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 09/05/2025 1. Pursuant to the order dated 08.04.2025, the notice issued to the victim has been served upon her, but neither the victim appeared in person or through virtual mode before the Court nor any representation is made on her behalf to make submissions on the bail application of the applicant. Since the applicant is in jail since 21.01.2025, therefore this Court proceeds to hear the bail application. VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.05.10 17:31:49 +0530 2 2. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1140 of 2024, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) 3(5), 333, 64(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNS’) and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’). 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.11.2024, the mother of the victim lodged a report to the police that on 19.11.2024, when she was in her house, the applicant along with his wife came to her house, started quarreling with her, that due to her previous report, they have spent more than Rs. 10 lakhs in the legal proceeding and asked to pay the same, or else they would get her video viral. When she protested, the applicant inserted his private part in the mouth of her minor son and abused her. The applicant and his wife have assaulted his minor son and her also. The FIR has been registered on 19.11.2024 for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act. During the investigation, the applicant has been arrested on 21.01.2025 and charge sheet has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that this is the third report lodged by the mother of the victim against the applicant, the first report was lodged on 27.06.2024 for the offence under Section 376 of IPC, in which the applicant was granted regular bail on 02.09.2024 by the High Court. Thereafter, on 07.09.2024, the mother 3 of the victim again lodged another report under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) and 333 of BNS, in which the applicant was again arrested and he was again released on bail on 08.11.2024. After releasing the applicant from jail, she again made a report on 21.11.2024 with respect to the incident of 19.11.2024. The mother of the victim kept the applicant somehow in the custody, for which she is repeatedly lodging the report against him. 5. Considering the conduct of the mother of the victim, the applicant has filed CRMP No. 216 of 2025 challenging the action of the mother of the victim and challenging the registration of the FIR, which was disposed of by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, reserving the liberty to the petitioner. He would also submit that on 21.11.2024, the wife of the present applicant has made a complaint to the I.G. police and on 14.09.2024, the family members of the applicant as well as persons of the vicinity have made a joint complaint to the Superintendent of Police with respect to the conduct of the victim. 6. He would further submit that the victim is indulged in lodging repeated reports against the present applicant. He would also submit that the FIR itself is wrong, as the applicant has remained in jail on her two earlier reports made by the victim and therefore there is no question to again went to her house and committed the offence with her minor son. The applicant is in jail since 21.01.2025, final adjudication of the case will take its own time and therefore he may be enlarged on bail. 4 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that on the report made by the mother of the victim, the FIR has been registered against the applicant, in which she disclosed the commission of the offence with her minor son. Injuries have been found on the body of the victim as well as the complainant. Looking to the previous reports also, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations and the material collected during the investigation, further considering that in two earlier complaints made by the mother of the victim, the applicant has been enlarged on bail and considering the manner in which the alleged offence is said to have been committed and the controversy between the parties, further that the applicant is in jail since 21.01.2025, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 10. Consequently, the present application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. 11. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, on following conditions:- (i) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person 5 acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the concerned trial Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved