1 CGHC010213002026 2026:CGHC:30194 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4971 of 2026 Satyendra Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Santanu Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Kumhari, P.S.- Gidhouri- Tundra, Distt.- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Gidhouri- Tundra, Distt.- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Shri Akash Agrawal, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 16/07/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the B.N.S.S.) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 72/2026 registered at Police Station – Gidhouri – Tundra, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 77, 79 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the BNS) and under Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the POCSO). 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 19.03.2026 at 09:30 am, when the prosecutrix/victim was taking bath, the applicant, who is the neighbour Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.07.16 16:43:44 +0530 2 of the prosecutrix, climbed on the roof of the house and was making obscene videos and even before this, one year ago, the said applicant was forcing her to come out of the room where she used to sleep and was speaking obscene words from outside the window at around 11:00 pm. Even thereafter, whenever the victim went out or came from somewhere, he used to follow her and pass inappropriate comments. Father of the prosecutrix reported the matter to the Police Station Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara. Based on this, offence under the aforesaid sections has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is second bail applicant and the bail application, i.e., MCRC No. 3393/2026, has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.04.2026. He further submits that the applicant is neighbour of the victim and due to some construction work, there was some dispute ensued between them, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 20.03.2026 and that, trial is going on and it may take some time to conclude. On these premises, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submitted that the applicant being neighbour of the victim, was recording video of a minor victim when she was taking bath and even prior to that, he used to utter obscene words from outside of the window where the victim was sleeping and not only this whenever the victim went out somewhere and was coming to her house, he used to follow and pass inappropriate comments over her, therefore, the applicant does not deserve regular bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. With the aid of D.L.S.A. Balodabazar-Bhatapara, the victim and her father are present and the victim has raised objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicant. 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the material available on record and that the trial is going on, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is rejected. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for information. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani