1 CGHC010350562026 2026:CGHC:42537 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8449 of 2026 Birbal Dhruw S/o Late Kamta Ram Dhruw Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Baherabuda, Police Station Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 246/2025, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the mother of the victim lodged a missing-person report stating that her daughter, aged about 15 years and 9 months, had gone missing from her house on 31.10.2025 at about 10:00 a.m. on the pretext of going to a nearby grocery shop to purchase household articles and did not return home. Despite search being made by the informant and her family members amongst the nearby villages and relatives, the victim could not be traced. Accordingly, Missing Report No. 43/2025 was registered and considering the age of the victim and apprehension of kidnapping, an offence under Section 137(2) of the BNS was registered against an unknown person. During investigation, the victim was recovered from the possession of the present applicant. On the basis of her statement and her age, the aforesaid offences under the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act were added against the applicant. The applicant was arrested on 10.06.2026 and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that there was a consensual relationship between the applicant and the victim and they have already solemnized marriage and there is a child born out of their wedlock. He would further contend that the victim has already been examined before the learned trial Court and has not supported the case of the prosecution. He would further submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant is 3 in custody since 10.06.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that on the date of the alleged incident, the victim was aged about 15 years and 9 months and was thus a minor. She would further submit that in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, the victim has made serious allegations of sexual assault against the present applicant. Therefore, she submits that the bail application of the applicant deserves to be dismissed. 5. Pursuant to the order dated 10.09.2026, the victim along with her mother appeared before this Court through video conferencing and the victim expressed her consent for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary as well as the material available on record. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the victim has already been examined before the learned trial Court and has not supported the case of the prosecution, coupled with the fact that the applicant and the victim have already solemnized marriage and there is a child born out of their wedlock and further considering that the victim, who appeared before this Court through video conferencing, has expressed her consent for grant of bail to the applicant, as also the fact that the applicant is in custody since 10.06.2026 and the charge-sheet has 4 already been filed before the competent Court, this Court is of the considered view thus, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 8. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 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 the 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, & (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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Kunal