1 CGHC010314182026 2026:CGHC:44031 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7508 of 2026 * - Ajay Kumar Ravi S/o Gajadhar Ravi Aged About 22 Years R/o Baserakhurd, P.S. Trikunda, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Of Police Station Shankaragarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12/10/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as he is in jail since 21.07.2026 in connection with Crime No. 141/2025 registered in Police Station – Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2) & 79 of BNS and Sections 67 & 67(A) of IT Act. 2. As per case of prosecution, the victim lodged an F.I.R. on 09.10.2025 against the applicant herein making allegation that between 13.09.2025 to 08.10.2025, the present applicant took objectionable photographs of the victim in secret manner and subsequently posted it Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.10.13 11:07:20 +0530 2 on the Instagram Account of her husband. On such complaint, the police registered the offence as stated above. 3. Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the case. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 21.07.2026, charge-sheet has already been filed and he has no criminal antecedent. Thus, he would pray for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose. She would contend that Cell-Phone of the applicant was seized and objectionable materials were recovered on Cell-Phone as well she submit that as there is serious allegation against the applicant, therefore, the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the allegation made against the applicant, charge- sheet has already been filed, he is in jail since 21.07.2026 and he has no criminal antecedent, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. 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 3 the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a 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 the disposal of the trial; and, IV. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. 8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti