1 CGHC010163052022 2026:CGHC:36094 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 548 of 2022 • Madan Kumar Kashyap S/o Murha Ram Kashyap Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Chote Aambal, P.S. Bhanpuri, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kondagaon District Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. The applicant has filed this criminal revision under Section 397 & 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the framing of charges under Sections 509(B), 354(A) of IPC and Section 11(2)(5) of POCSO and Section 67, 67A of I.T. Act by the learned Additional Session Judge (F.T.C.) Kondagon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) in POCSO Case No. 23/2021. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim was major at the time of filing of complaint, therefore, POCSO Act is not applicable and to substantiate his submission he has referred to MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2026.08.14 19:06:03 +0530 2 document - marksheet of Class 10th. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that whether POCSO Act is applicable or not can be adjudicated by examining the victim also and by recording of the evidence, therefore, at this juncture learned trial Court has not committed any illegality in framing of charges. 4. Considering the rival submissions of the parties, since all the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant required to be ascertained by recording of evidence only, as such, at this juncture this Court is restrained from interference in the framing of charges. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to raise all his defense permissible to him under the law before the trial Court and the trial Court will decide the criminal trial without being influenced from any of the observation made by this Court while disposing of the criminal revision. Even the disposal of the criminal revision will not preclude the trial Court to decide the case on its own merit. 5. With aforesaid observation and direction, the criminal revision is disposed of. 6. Interim order dated 14.06.2022 passed by this Court stands vacated. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Manish