Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46891 (CHH)

JAWAHARLAL VISHWAKARMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/1581/2025 · 2025-11-05

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1581 of 2025 Jawaharlal Vishwakarma Son Of Bishesar Vishwakarma Aged About 60 Years Resident Of House No. 390/c, Zone 3, B.M.Y., Ward No. 26, Bhilai- Charoda, District Durg (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rudra Pratap Dubey , Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 06.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.470/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 79 of BNS 2023 and Section 8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on that on 30.08.2025, at 12:00 P.M., complainant's 7-year-old minor daughter went to the bathroom to bath and freshen up. At that very moment, Jawahar Vishwakarma VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.10 17:53:36 +0530 2 / 3 (present accused), a neighbor from Bhilai, who had recently visited his brother's house, was exposing his genitals with malicious intent. Seeing this, her minor daughter screamed loudly. She scolded him, and he left. Thereafter the complainant (mother of victim) and her mother- in-law went to house of accused and scolded him, but he remained silent. Based on the written complaint, by mother of prosecutrix a FIR has been registered, under Section 79 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that he was completely unaware of the fact that the prosecutrix was inside the bathroom and had not even touched her, coincidentally, the door of the bathroom was open when the applicant went there to use the toilet. The applicant’s intention was bona fide, and he did not utter a single filthy or indecent word to the prosecutrix. The First Information Report has been lodged with inordinate and unexplained delay only to falsely implicate the applicant. The applicant is a retired government employee, a senior citizen having grandchildren in his family, and a reputed person in society, whose image and reputation would be seriously tarnished if arrested by the police. The essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the applicant. The applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits the notice 3 / 3 has already been served to the prosecutrix in compliance of the order dated 14.10.2025. He further submits that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the victim on the pretext of marriage, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offence, the material available in the case diary, and the specific allegation that the applicant was found committing an obscene act in a manner that caused distress and hurt to the sentiments of a minor child, the act attributed to the applicant is serious in nature and affects the moral fabric of society. Such conduct, reflects moral depravity and has a direct bearing on public decency and child protection. Therefore, after careful consideration of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the serious nature of the allegations, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is not entitled to be grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Jawaharlal Vishwakarma, involved in Crime No.470/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 79 of BNS 2023 and Section 8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012. , is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav