1 CGHC010300912026 2026:CGHC:42542 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7105 of 2026 1 - Biru Dhiwar S/o Bisarilal Dhiwar Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Khatola, P/s Akaltara District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 2 - Om Kishan S/o Arvind Kumar Dhiwar Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Khatola, P/s Akaltara District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 417/2026, registered at Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 296, 115(2), 309(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.07.2026, the applicants allegedly approached the victim and her friend while they were sitting near a culvert and started recording a video of them on their mobile phones. When they objected, the applicants allegedly abused and assaulted them and made physical contact with the private parts of the victim while continuing to record the incident. It is further alleged that the applicants took away the mobile phones of the victim and her friend and fled from the spot. During investigation, two mobile phones were allegedly seized from the possession of the applicants on the basis of their memorandum statements. Accordingly, aforesaid offences were registered against them. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the applicants are in judicial custody since 19.07.2026 and further submits that there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, as the alleged incident took place on 15.07.2026, whereas the FIR was lodged on 18.07.2026. He would further submit that, as per the prosecution itself, the victim was sitting on a culvert along with her friend when the present applicants came there and scolded them and thereafter, the present FIR was lodged. He would further submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to the 3 applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the applicants have allegedly committed an offence of outraging the modesty of the victim and serious allegations have been levelled against them. She would further submit that, in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, serious allegations have been made against the applicants. However, she fairly submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Nevertheless, having regard to the nature and seriousness of the allegations, she submits that the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary and other material available on record. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants and particularly, considering the fact that the applicants are in custody since 19.07.2026, charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicants have no criminal antecedents, coupled with the fact that no video clip relating to the alleged incident has been found in the mobile phones seized from the applicants and there is a delay of about three days in lodging the FIR without any satisfactory explanation therefore, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants deserve to be released on regular bail. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) they 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. - S/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Kunal