1 CGHC010272882026 2026:CGHC:41722 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6370 of 2026 Ajay Kumar Yadav S/o Late Chotu Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Pisaud, Ward No. 20, Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh (As Per Charge Sheet). ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/09/2026 1. This First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred by the applicant for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, and 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that a missing person report was lodged at Police Station Janjgir, pursuant to which Crime No. 02/2026 was NADIM MOHLE Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE Date: 2026.09.26 10:31:17 +0530 2 registered. During the course of investigation, the minor victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant on 27.03.2026 in the presence of witnesses, and a recovery panchnama was duly prepared. The applicant was thereafter arrested on 28.03.2026. It is alleged that the applicant had enticed the minor victim and taken her to Noida, where they stayed for approximately three months, during the said period she was subjected to sexual assault, and she conceived. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that applicant is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The investigation has already been completed, the charge-sheet has been duly filed before the trial court, and further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 28.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time; thus, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would vehemently oppose the prayer for bail and submit that the victim was a minor aged about 16.5 years at the time of the incident. She would further submit that the victim, during her examination before the learned trial court, fully supported the prosecution case, and stated that she was taken to Noida by the applicant and she was subjected to continuous sexual assault, and she got pregnant; thus, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. On 18.09.2026, the victim along with her parents appeared before this Court via video conferencing and raised strong objections to the enlargement of the applicant on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered the material available in the case diary. 7. From perusal of the case diary, it appears that the victim was a minor, aged approximately 16½ years, at the time of the alleged offence. The 3 victim was recovered from the custody and possession of the applicant. The victim has already been examined before the learned Trial Court and has supported the prosecution case. She stated that the applicant abducted her, took her to Noida, and subjected her to sexual assault, resulting in her pregnancy. The victim and her parents also appeared before this Court through video conferencing on 18.09.2026 and opposed the grant of bail to the applicant. Mere filing of the charge- sheet and the applicant’s incarceration since 28.03.2026, do not constitute sufficient grounds to dilute the gravity of the alleged offences committed against a minor. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, prima facie evidence on record and the objection raised by the victim, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 is rejected. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim