1 2026:CGHC:25472 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3833 of 2026 Priyanka Singh W/o Akish Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Kedarbadhi Khairagarh Road Dongargarh Tehsil - Dongargarh District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh (Husband Name Wrongly Mentioned As Atish Singh In Impugned Order) (Correct Address Mentioned) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 574/2025 registered at Police Station- Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 117(2), 117(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present applicant is employed as a Mathematics teacher at Khasra Public School, Dongargarh, along with the co-accused, namely, Namrata Sahu. It is alleged that on 02.07.2025, during school hours, the victim, Sarthak Sahare, a student of Class VII, was instructed by the teachers to take out his books along with the other students. However, the victim allegedly failed to comply with the said instruction. Thereafter, co-accused Namrata Sahu informed the present applicant about the conduct of the victim, whereupon the applicant allegedly folded the victim’s ear and slapped him twice on his cheeks. As a result of the said act, the victim is stated to have suffered difficulty in hearing. On the basis of the said allegations, the present FIR came to be registered against the applicant. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the victim was suffering from pre-existing neurological ailments and hearing-related issues much prior to the alleged incident, which fact was within the knowledge of the victim and his family members. He further submits that though it has been alleged that the victim sustained hearing impairment on account of the slaps allegedly administered by the applicant, the medical records do not support such allegation. Attention has been invited to the communications exchanged between the Principal of the school and the treating doctors, wherein it has been opined that there was no damage to the victim’s eardrum and that the victim was suffering 3 from nerve-related weakness requiring consultation with a specialist. It is further submitted that another treating doctor diagnosed the victim with Idiopathic Sensorineural Hearing Loss and advised further treatment, thereby indicating that the hearing condition was not attributable to the alleged incident. He argues that even if the prosecution case is accepted in its entirety, no material is available to establish a causal nexus between the alleged act of the applicant and the hearing impairment claimed by the victim. It is further submitted that the FIR has been lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay, which casts serious doubt on the prosecution story. He also contends that the disability certificate relied upon by the prosecution does not conclusively establish that the alleged disability was caused by the act of the applicant, nor does it specify whether the disability is permanent in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant has been serving as a Mathematics teacher since the year 2009 and has an unblemished service record with no prior complaint against her. Owing to the incident, she has already been suspended and subsequently terminated from service and is presently unemployed. The applicant is a 45-year-old woman having the responsibility of maintaining her family, including her teenage daughter and unemployed husband. He further submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, she is in jail since 11.04.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is contended that the victim, a minor student aged about 13 years old, studying in Class VII, sustained hearing impairment as a consequence of the physical assault allegedly committed by the applicant while discharging her duties as a teacher. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation sufficient material has been collected indicating the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence and, on the basis of the medical evidence and disability certificate obtained during investigation, offence under Section 117(3) of the BNS has also been incorporated. She submits that the veracity and evidentiary value of the medical opinions and documents relied upon by the applicant are matters of trial and cannot be conclusively adjudicated at the stage of consideration of bail. It is further contended that the allegations pertain to physical violence against a minor child within the school premises by a teacher entrusted with the responsibility of care and discipline of students and, therefore, she is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the material available on record, and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that 5 the applicant is a 45-year-old lady and a teacher by profession who has been serving in the field of education since the year 2009. The allegation against the applicant is that she folded the ear of the victim and slapped him during school hours on account of his alleged indiscipline. The record further reveals that there are rival claims regarding the cause of the hearing impairment allegedly suffered by the victim, and the applicant has placed reliance upon medical opinions suggesting that the victim was suffering from pre- existing neurological and hearing-related issues. Whether the alleged hearing disability is directly attributable to the act of the applicant or is a consequence of any pre-existing medical condition is a matter which would require appreciation of evidence during trial. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is a woman, the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has already suffered suspension and termination from service, she is in jail since 11.04.2026 and her further custodial detention does not appear necessary for the purpose of investigation. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the age and status of the applicant, the nature of allegations, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the fact that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Priyanka Singh, involved in Crime No. 574/2025 registered at Police Station- Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, 6 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 117(2), 117(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 be released on bail on her 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 7 (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 her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan