1 CGHC010290242026 2026:CGHC:40847 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6819 of 2026 Abhishek Gupta S/o Shri Rajesh Gupta Aged About 24 Years R/o Mo. Main Road (Ward No. 6) Police Station And Tehsil Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur, District- Surguja (Ambikapur) Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Senior Counsel appears along with Shri Waquar Naiyyar and Shri Danish A. Siddiqui, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 18/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.448/2026, registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the victim lodged F.I.R. on 02.07.2026 making allegations that in the year 2016 when she was aged about 13-14 years, the present applicant, on pretext of marriage, had maintained physical relationship with her on numerous occasions. Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.09.21 13:22:40 +0530 2 In the year, the applicant started demanding money and returned gifts from the victim. Thereafter, the F.I.R. was lodged. 3. Victim appeared through the video conferencing and raised serious objection to grant bail to the applicant. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant would argue that in the year 2016, the applicant was 14 years old. He would submit that there was love affair between the applicant and the victim, which continued for considerable period and there was consensual relationship between both of them. It is also argued that the victim was married on 06.02.2026 with one Shiv Kumar Kansal (Agrawal) and even thereafter, she maintained relationship with the applicant and this fact came into the knowledge of her husband and on account of societal pressure, she lodged F.I.R. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 03.07.2026 and charge-sheet has already been filed and that conclusion of trial may take some considerable time, therefore, he prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and contend that the victim was sexually assaulted by the present applicant when she was minor, aged about 13 -14 years in the year 2016. She would submit that there are serious allegations against the present applicant, and therefore, the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. In the present case, F.I.R. was lodged on 02.07.2026 and at that time, age of the victim was 24 years. She has narrated the incident which had taken place way back in the year 2016 when her age was 13 -14 3 years and at that time, age of the applicant was 14 -15 years. It is also stated in the F.I.R. that there was love affair between the applicant and the victim, which continued for considerable period. It is also informed that the victim was married to one Shiv Kumar Kansal (Agrawal) on 06.02.2026 and even thereafter she maintained relationship with the present applicant and this fact came into the knowledge of the husband of the victim and thereafter F.I.R. was lodged. Further, charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 03.07.2026, therefore, looking to the above stated facts and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some considerable time, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 4 against him, 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 him in accordance with law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani