1 CGHC010309862026 2026:CGHC:41226 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7999 of 2026 1 - Avinash @ Shubham Tamboli S/o Ram Milan Tamboli Aged About 28 Years R/o Village- Manjhali, Talab Gali, Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant /State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 22/09/2026 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. 183/2026, registered at HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.09.23 10:54:03 +0530 2 Police Station Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 and 65(1) of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the minor victim, aged about 13 years 9 months was missing from her house due to which a missing complaint was lodged by the mother of the minor victim on 26/04/2026 and subsequently, the victim was recovered on 27/04/2026, her statement was recorded wherein she has stated that the applicant had taken her to Kudri Barrage and thereafter, to Bilaspur on the pretext of marrying her wherein they had stayed together during the night and established physical relations. On the basis of such allegations, the police arrested the present applicant. 3. Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant, would contend that there is no serious allegation against the applicant as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS and victim and her mother appeared before the trial Court as PW 1 and PW 2 on 05/08/2026 wherein their statements were recorded and they have not at all supported the case of the prosecution and they have even denied the suggestions made by the Public Prosecutor. He would further contend that victim has given her consent for grant of bail to the applicant. Moreover, the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 27/04/2026, thus, the appellant be released on bail as conclusion of trial is likely to take some time. 3 4. On the other hand, Ms. Ankita Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application and submit that at the time of the incident, the victim was aged about 13 years and 7 months and there are serious allegations of sexual assault against the applicant which have also been proved by the positive FSL report, therefore, he is not liable to be released on bail. 5. The victim along with her mother appeared before this Court through video conferencing from the concerned District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and gives her consent for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 7. Admittedly, it is true that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, has made serious allegations of sexual assault against the present applicant, however, later on, she and her mother appeared before the trial Court as PW-1 and PW-2 and in their statements before the Court below, they have not at all supported the case of the prosecution and even denied the suggestions made by the Public Prosecutor. 8. Thus, having considered the evidence of the victim and her mother (PW-1 and PW-2) and further taking into account that the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has already been submitted and the applicant is in custody since 27/04/2026; the victim has given her consent for grant of bail to the applicant, this 4 Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is of the considered view that a fit case for grant of regular bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant is allowed. 9. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail, on following conditions :- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 10. The observation made herein-above is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Harneet