1 2026:CGHC:1088 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9497 of 2025 Ghooran Ram Patel S/o Mohan Patel Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Shivri, Police Chowki - Wadrafnagar, Police Station - Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Basatpur, District – Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 180/2025, registered at Police Station – Basantpur District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75(1) of the BNS and Section 8, 10, of the Protection of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.08 12:07:59 +0530 2 Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1)(w)(i) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant i.e. father of the prosecutrix minor girl was lodged the written report in the Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) on 27/09/2025 to effect that he belongs to the Scheduled Tribes community and his daughter is styding in Class - 7th middle school, village-jhorpara, Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.). It is alleged that on 22/09/2025, when the father of the prosecutrix told his daughter to go the school for study, then she replied that she will study but will not go to school and on enquiry regarding the reply, she replied that she already told her elder sister. The complainant directed his wife to ask elder daughter regarding the reason behind such reply by the victim/prosecutrix that she will not go to school. It is alleged that elder daughter of the complainant told that on the date of incident i.e. 20/09/2025 at about 07:00 AM, the Head Master of above said school, the present applicant committed molestation against the victim/prosecutrix and pressed her breast with intent to outrage the modesty at the time of exercise in one of the room iof the school and on 22/09/2025 again when she was in school, the present applicant called her and pressed her breast It is alleged by the victim/prosecutrix that she was scared due to aforesaid incident committed by the present applicant. It is further alleged that the Head Master of above said school knowingly the facts that the victim/prosecutrix belongs to the Scheduled Tribes community, 3 pressed her breast again and again with intent to outrage the modesty. On the basis of written report preferred by the complainant i.e. father of the prosecutrix minor girl on 27/09/2025, the police of the Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) registered an offence bearing Crime No. 180/2025 for offence punishable u/s 74, 75(i) of B.N.S., 08, 10 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and 3 (1) (w) (i) of Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and investigation was initiated. The charge sheet has been filed by the Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) before the competent court. Hence, the applicant committed the offence against the prosecutrix by way touched her breast with intent to outrage the modesty. After the incident, the father of the prosecutrix went to lodge the report against the accused person in the Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that applicant is a teacher and has falsely implicated by the father of the victim as no prima facie material has been brought on record to establish his involvement in the alleged offence, nor has the prosecution been able to demonstrate the essential ingredients of the offence, including mens rea. The entire prosecution story appears to be motivated by an unlawful demand for money by the complainant, as is evident from the series of events narrated in the applicant’s complaint dated 30/09/2025 addressed to the Inspector General of Police, Range Surguja, supported by 4 contemporaneous documents such as school attendance records, examination answer sheets, Phone-Pay transaction details, and panchnama, which clearly indicate that no such offence was ever committed and that the allegations arose only after the applicant refused to meet the illegal monetary demands of the complainant. The FIR has been lodged with unexplained delay, further strengthening the defence version of false implication. The investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed; however, the prosecution has examined only interested witnesses, namely the victim and her parents, and has failed to examine any independent witnesses despite their availability, which casts serious doubt on the prosecution case. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 14/10/2025, is a government servant working as Head Master, has no criminal antecedents, is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his continued incarceration is causing grave financial and social hardship to his dependents. Since the investigation is over, there is no possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The applicant is a permanent resident, undertakes to face the trial, and is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court; therefore, in the interest of justice, the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel vehemently opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that, in compliance with the order of this Hon’ble Court dated 17.12.2025, notice has already been duly served upon the father of the victim. It is further submitted that during the course of events, an amount of Rs. 98,000/- was allegedly paid by the applicant to the father of the victim, 5 and it was alleged that the said amount was accepted under pressure and coercion; however, it is also stated that the father of the victim subsequently returned the said amount. The learned State Counsel further submits that the applicant has categorically denied the aforesaid allegations regarding the payment and return of money. It is further contended that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case after due investigation, which prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. In view of the seriousness of the allegations, the learned State Counsel submits that the applicant does not deserve the discretionary relief of bail 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicant, moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 14.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Ghooran Ram Patel, involved in Crime No. 180/2025, registered at Police Station – Basantpur District - Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75(1) of the BNS and Section 8, 10, of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1)(w)(i) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989., be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 6 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 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. (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 vaibhav