1 2026:CGHC:7362 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 142 of 2026 Rashu Netam S/o Shri Magadu Netam Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kakadgaon, Thana And Tehsil- Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Binu Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 10/02/2026 1. The victim and her father appeared virtually and recorded ‘no objection’ in granting bail to the Applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 87/2025, registered at Police Station – Kondagaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 74 of BNS and Sections 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 01.03.2025, the applicant induced the minor victim, grabbed her hands and tried to outrage her SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.02.11 15:50:00 +0530 2 modesty. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 03.03.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. A false allegation has been leveled by the victim against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.03.2025, out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 10 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take some more time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the case's facts, prosecution evidence, applicant's detention period, and noting the victim and her father have no objection to bail, with the victim already examined and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 9. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham