1 2025:CGHC:58229 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8713 of 2025 1 - Ajay Nayak S/o Bhuneshwar Nayak Aged About 24 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Fulwari Para, Bagbahara, P/s Bagbahara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 2 - Karan Mahanand S/o Rajkumar Mahanand Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Fulwari Para, Bagbahara, P/s Bagbahara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicants. Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Bagbahara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 01/12/2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.238/2025, registered at PS -Bagbahara, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for commission of offence punishable under Sections 74, 333 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. 2 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that complainant has lodged a report on 21.10.2025 alleging that in front of her house, the applicants have used the abusive language, when her minor daughter restrain them not to use abusive language, applicants have tried to outrage her modesty. Based upon report, FIR was registered and applicants have been arrested in aforementioned crime/offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant have been falsely implicated in this case, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. Applicants having no intention to outrage the modesty of the prosecutrix, in fact, on the date of the incident, applicants have talked to each other, but prosecutrix unnecessarily involved in the aforesaid talk which is going on between them, due to which, some hot talk took place between prosecutrix and the applicants, but mother of the prosecutrix with intention to send the applicants behind the bar, has lodged report and falsely implicated the applicants in the alleged commission of offence/crime. There is no evidence/material available in the case diary which shows that applicants have committed the alleged offence/crime. Applicants are in jail since 22.10.2025, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, applicants may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposing the bail application of the applicants and submits that applicants have committed the alleged offence/crime with minor victim (aged about 15 years 04 months), hence, they are not entitled grant of bail. 3 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Pursuant to order of this Court, victim and her mother were appeared before this Court on 21.11.2025 by virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and they raised no objection in granting bail to the applicants. 7. Considering facts of the case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that victim and her mother have no objection in granting bail to the applicants, further considering the detention period of applicants, conclusion of trial may take some time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicants shall be released on regular bail, on their furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of concerned Court on the conditions that- a) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. b) Applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and c) Applicants shall appear before trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-