1 2026:CGHC:23055 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3122 of 2026 1 - Om Pav S/o Amrit Lal Pav Aged About 18 Years Sukulbhathali, P.S.- Pusour, District- Raigarh (Cg) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Pusour, District- Raigarh (Cg) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 316/2025, registered at Police Station – Pusour, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 75(2), 75(3) & 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and 66(D) of IT Act. ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on 27.11.2025, the prosecutrix lodged a written report at Police Station Pusour alleging therein that she operates an Instagram account under the name “pihu pobiya”. It has further been alleged that on 25.08.2025, she had earlier lodged a report against the present applicant alleging commission of rape, pursuant to which the applicant was arrested and was subsequently released on bail. The prosecutrix further alleged that on 26.11.2025, the applicant, through his Instagram account namely “its vishu 21h”, transmitted her nude photographs to her Instagram account, and further sent obscene messages through other Instagram accounts namely “its om paw 2137” and “cute boys”. Owing to the aforesaid acts, the prosecutrix allegedly felt humiliated and disgraced. On the basis of the said written report, the present crime came to be registered against the applicant for the alleged offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a student of Class-10th and, owing to his incarceration since 08.01.2026, he is unable to prepare for his final examinations, the schedule whereof has already been declared and placed on record as Annexure A/3. Learned counsel further contends that an earlier FIR had also been lodged against the applicant under Section 376 of the IPC, in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the competent Court, and 3 subsequent to his release on bail, the present allegations regarding transmission of obscene photographs and messages have been levelled against him. It is further submitted that, apart from the prosecutrix, only two witnesses have been examined till date and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is a criminal antecedent against the present applicant, inasmuch as an offence under Section 376 of the IPC has already been registered against him. It is further submitted that this Court, vide order dated 08.04.2026, had directed the Investigating Officer to file an affidavit regarding the mobile phone allegedly used in the commission of the offence, and from the affidavit so filed, it is evident that the seized mobile phone belongs to the present applicant and was used in the commission of the alleged offence. On the aforesaid grounds, learned State counsel submits that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and, particularly taking into account that the applicant is a Class-10th 4 student, he is in judicial custody since 08.01.2026, only two witnesses apart from the prosecutrix have been examined till date, and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Om Pav, involved in Crime No. 316/2025, registered at Police Station – Pusour, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 75(2), 75(3) & 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and 66(D) of IT Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 5 presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saxena