Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17911 (CHH)

SHAILESH BHAI PARMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/1553/2026 · 2026-02-25

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:10009 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1553 of 2026 Shailesh Bhai Parmar S/o Late Shri Govind Bhai Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Timba, P.S.- Kakanpur, District - Panchamahal, Gujrat. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through P.S. Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh For the applicant : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunita Manikpuri, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 26.02.2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 111/2025 registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(M) of BNS and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.02.27 12:24:22 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, on 03.03.2025 a missing report was lodged by the father of victim that his daughter was missing since 02.03.2025 and after search she could not be traced. He has stated that some unknown person had enticed her away from their lawful guardianship. On such report, the crime was registered and during investigation, the victim was recovered and the applicant was arrested on 14.12.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is clear from the victim’s court statement that the victim is a major lady, she has not at all supported the prosecution case as she has categorically stated that no incident was caused with her by the applicant. He further submits that though the applicant is shown to be minor, the evidence of her correct age has not been proved. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 14.12.2025; till date out of a total 25 witnesses, only one witness i.e., the victim has been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident and the material witness mother is yet to be examined. 5. The victim along with her father has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and expressed no-objection to granting bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further looking to the court statement of the victim as also the fact that the conclusion of trial is likely to take time, without 3 observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed in that behalf. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao