1 2026:CGHC:27484 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5090 of 2026 Priyesh Kumar @ Pintu S/o Raj Kumar Bhuinhar, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village Kurludih, Police Station Sanawal, Dist. Balrampur – Ramanujganj, (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Sanawal Dist. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Amiya Bhushan, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 03/07/2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.48/2025, registered at P.S.- Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 70(2), 65(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 5(g)/ 6, 4(2) of POCSO Act. PRAKASH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRAKASH KUMAR Date: 2026.07.03 16:07:13 +0530 2 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant (mother of the victim) lodged a report at the concerned police station alleging that on 15.08.2025, her minor daughter had gone to attend natures call, at that time, the applicant caught hold her and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her daughter (victim). On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered the offence against the applicant. 3. In compliance of order dated 04.06.2026, the victim is present along with her mother through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA, and on being asked, they have raised ‘ no objection’ to the application filed by the applicant for grant of bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the victim and her mother have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that at the time of alleged incident, the victim was a major girl. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.08.2025 and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application filed by the applicant. He further submits that as per Dakhil Kharij Panji, the date of birth of the victim is 25.03.2012, as such, at the time of alleged incident, the victim was aged about 13 years and the applicant has committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that evidence of other prosecution witnesses are 3 yet to be recorded, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Prakash