1 CGHC010263492026 2026:CGHC:34610 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1116 of 2026 Xyz (Minor) Through His Father ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station- Pandariya, District- Kabirdham, C.G. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2026 1. Vide order dated 16.07.2026, notice was issued to the victim to appear before this Court through the concerned DLSA or through counsel. The said notice was duly served upon the victim, however, the victim did not appear before the Court. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 140/2026, registered at Police Station : Pandariya District - Kabirdham VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.07 12:29:45 +0530 2 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 351(3), 64(2) (m), 65(1) of the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 3. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 16.06.2026, Father of the Victim/ Prosecutrix had lodged report against the applicant at Police Station-Pandariya, District-Kabirdham (C.G.) and stating that on dated 13.06.2026 at about 11.00-11.30 P.M. his minor daughter had gone to courtyard (Badi) for toilet purpose meanwhile she listen some sound and during the course of that time applicant forcefully took her at his house thereafter committed sexual intercourse 3-4 times, this fact is narrated by his minor daughter to his wife. On the basis of that complaint F.I.R. has been registered against the applicant under section 137(2), 351 (3), 64 (2) (m), 65 (1) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to opposition from the family members of the victim, as the applicant and the victim are neighbours and belong to the same caste and community. It is submitted that on the alleged date of incident, the applicant was present at his house with his family members and has no connection with the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and that there was a delay in lodging the report, as the alleged incident occurred on 13.06.2026 whereas the report was lodged by the father of the victim on 16.06.2026. It is also submitted that the victim had already attained majority on the date of the alleged incident and there is no material to 3 show otherwise. The applicant is a permanent resident, there is no likelihood of his absconding, and he undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned State counsel has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that, from the material collected during investigation, there are specific allegations against the applicant/juvenile in conflict with law of having forcibly taken the 12- year-old minor victim from her house after covering her mouth, taken her to his house and subjected her to repeated sexual assault. It is further submitted that the allegations disclose commission of penetrative sexual assault and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim, coupled with an allegation of extending threat to her life. It is, therefore, contended that the allegations are of a grave and serious nature and that, at this stage, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having considered the submissions of learned State counsel and perused the case diary, it appears that the applicant/juvenile in conflict with law is alleged to have forcibly taken the 12-year-old minor victim from her house by covering her mouth, taken her to his house and subjected her to repeated sexual intercourse, including penetrative sexual assault and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, and also threatened her with dire consequences. The allegations are grave and serious in nature and the material available in the case diary prima 4 facie indicates the involvement of the applicant/juvenile in conflict with law in the alleged offence. The defence taken by the applicant disputing the allegations is a matter of evidence, which cannot be conclusively adjudicated at this stage. Considering the age of the victim, the nature and gravity of the allegations and the prima facie material available on record, this Court is not inclined to extend the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Xyz (Minor) Through His Father, involved in Crime No. 140/2026, registered at Police Station : Pandariya District- Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 351(3), 64(2)(m), 65(1) of the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, is rejected. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav