1 / 3 2025:CGHC:4575 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 134 of 2025 1 - Mehul Kumar Yadav S/o Late Gopiram Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Banki 2 Number Basti, Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Khare, Advocate For State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 24/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested on 13/08/2024 in connection with Crime No. 128/2024, registered at Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 75 (i) (ii), 76, 79 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 08/08/2024 when the prosecutrix were sleeping in their house at that time some noise came from the roof of the bedroom and the applicant was peeping from the ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.28 18:08:29 +0530 2 / 3 curtain and when the prosecutrix was getting up from the bed at that time the applicant entered in the room and climbed on the bed and removed his clothes and was showing his private part and thereafter he pressed the chest of the prosecutrix on such act being done, the prosecutrix started shouting, the applicant fled away. Thereafter, the entire incident was reported to the mother of the prosecutrix and she lodged the report. On the report of the complainant an FIR was lodged and the applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged him and he has been falsely implicated on the basis of the memorandum statement of the sister. He would next contend that the false FIR has been lodged because of previous enmity with the applicant. He would next contend that the applicant has not even visited the house of the prosexutrix, therefore, the ingredients of the offence as alleged against the applicant would not be attracted. He would lastly contend that the applicant is in jail since 13/08/2024, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. Victim along with her father appeared through video conferencing from DLSA Korba and they recorded their objection in granting bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length and perused the documents. 3 / 3 7. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the nature of offence committed by the applicant and the objection raised by the prosecutrix, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu