1 2025:CGHC:57276 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9147 of 2025 1 - Hulesh Sahu S/o Shri Jayprakash Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Lodhajhar, Police Station - Bhupdevpur, Tahsil Kharsia, And District- Raigarh, (C.G.) (As Per Case Diary Hulesh Kumar Sahu) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Of Police Station Bhupdevpur, Tahsil Kharsia And District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Shri Abhishek Saraf, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms.Priya Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/11/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.11.28 11:09:35 +0530 2 in custody in connection with Crime No. 142/2025 registered at police station Bhupdevpur, Tahsil Kharsia, District Raigarh (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 74,78,79, 3(5) of the BNSS and Sections 8 & 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Facts of the case are that the prosecutrix filed a written complaint alleging that she was studying in class 11 and is aged about 16 years. It is alleged that she got acquainted with the applicant since 2022 and used to roam as they were having love affair, which the family members opposed and had done counseling to the applicant. However, on 28,.08.2025, the applicant despite refusal by the prosecutrix behaved obscenely and on 28.10.2025, at Basnajhar fair, the applicant showed obscene gestures intending to intimidate her. Based on the said complaint, the applicant was arrest and charge sheet was filed. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and the prosecutrix is claimed to be a consenting party having a consensual relationship with the applicant since long. It is submitted that when the applicant refused to marry her, the prosecutrix lodged the complaint. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal record and has been in judicial custody since 29.10.2025, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 3 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application. 5. Victim and her father are present before this Court and they have no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and this Court finds that the prosecution story primarily hinges on alleged acts of pressure, following and obscene behaviour where the prosecutrix claims consent and major. Further the applicant is lodged in custody since 29.10.2025, the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant has no prior criminal record. The prosecutrix’s contention of being a major consenting party and the applicant’s denial of guilt raise significant disputed questions of fact to be determined at the trial. Considering the above, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of jail. Accordingly, his bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions: i) He/she shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. ii) He/she shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Iii) the applicant is directed not to communicate/contact in any manner with the 4 prosecutrix, her family members and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet any other person concerned or attempt to ask for any favour in the trial directly or indirectly. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge