1 2025:CGHC:59772 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1835 of 2025 Nikesh Kumar Pulast S/o Geeta Pratap Pulast, Aged About 25 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Chepa, Police Station Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 09.12.2025 1. Pursuant to the order dated 21.11.2025, the victim, along with her mother, appeared through virtual mode from DLSA, Korba, and raised an objection to the grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, which is hereby taken on record. 2. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 370/2025 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.10 12:17:56 +0530 2 registered at Police Station – Pali, District – Korba (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 78(2), 296 of BNS 2023 and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the prosecutrix lodged written report at Police Station, Pali, alleging therein that on 27.09.2025 at about 3.00 Noon, she was standing in Bus Stand, Pali, at that time, the applicant came there and forced her to talk with him, but she was objected, due to which, the applicant caught hold her hand and started abusing her, at that time, her brother-in-law (Jeeja) reached there and the applicant fled away in Scooty. On the basis of above report, the offences under Section 74, 78(2), 296 of B.N.S. and Section 8 of POCSO Act have been registered against the applicant in Crime No. 370/2025. The applicant is not filing the copy of FIR as the matter is sensitive in nature. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicant has not used any criminal force against the prosecutrix nor committed any act that would attract the allegation of outraging her modesty. It is further submitted that on the date of the incident, the applicant and the prosecutrix were known to each other and were engaged in conversation when the prosecutrix’s brother-in- law allegedly saw them together, and due to the pressure exerted by him, the report came to be lodged against the applicant. According to the applicant, the contents of the written report do not disclose any offence against him. It is also submitted that the applicant is a young individual and that his continued pre-trial detention would adversely 3 affect his future prospects. In these circumstances, the applicant prays for being released on bail. 5. Learned State Counsel has opposed the anticipatory bail application and submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are of a serious nature. It is contended that on 27.09.2025, at about 3:00 p.m., when the prosecutrix was standing at the Bus Stand, Pali, the applicant approached her and attempted to forcibly engage her in conversation. Upon her objection, the applicant allegedly caught hold of her hand and used abusive language. At that moment, the prosecutrix’s brother-in-law (Jeeja) arrived at the spot, whereafter the applicant fled from the scene on a scooty. Considering the conduct attributed to the applicant and the nature of the accusations, it is submitted that the applicant does not deserve the benefit of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, and the material available in the case diary, it appears that on 27.09.2025 at about 3:00 p.m., when the prosecutrix was standing at the Bus Stand, Pali, the applicant approached her and attempted to forcibly engage her in conversation, and upon her objection, the applicant allegedly caught hold of her hand and used abusive language, whereafter, on the arrival of her brother-in-law (Jeeja), the applicant fled from the spot on a scooty. The statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) fully supports the prosecution version, and she has also categorically objected to the 4 grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. In view of the conduct attributed to the applicant, the seriousness of the accusations, and the objection raised by the prosecutrix, this Court does not find any ground to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail, and accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected. 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Nikesh Kumar Pulast, involved in Crime No. 370/2025 registered at Police Station – Pali, District – Korba (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 78(2), 296 of BNS 2023 and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav