1 2026:CGHC:8077 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 935 of 2026 Pritam Sidar S/o Rameshwar Sidar Aged About 32 Years Caste- Gond, R/o Village Bandhapali, Outpost Faguram, Police Station Dabhra, District Sakti C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dabhra, District Sakti C.G. ... Respondent {Cause title, as taken from Case Information System} For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Sharma and Mr. Chandra Prakash Choubey, Advocate. For Res./State : Ms. Avleen Juneja, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 13/02/2026 1. The victim and her mother appeared through Video Conferencing and recorded ‘No objection’ in granting bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail 2 as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 04/2026, registered at Police Station – Dabhra, District Sakti (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 74 & 78 (2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 8 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offneces Act, 2012 (for brevity, “POCSO”). 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 01.01.2026 at about 5 O'clock in the evening when the victim and her sister-in-law (Bhabhi) were going to Market for purchasing vegetables, at that time, the applicant came there and caught hold of the hand of victim, but the victim freed herself from the clutches of the applicant and went to her house alongwith her sister-in-law. On the way, the victim met with her brother and narrate the entire incident to him. Thereafter, when the brother of the victim asked the applicant/accused with regard to such conduct, he fled away from the spot. Based on above, aforesaid offences have been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 02.01.2026. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that as per case of the prosecution, the alleged incident had occurred in the open market, but the prosecution has not produced any independent witness to substantiate the fact that applicant has committed alleged wrong act with her. He next submits that the applicant is in detention since 02.01.2026 and the trial yet not commenced and is likely to take some time to be finalized and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the manner in which alleged offence is said to have been committed by the applicant with the minor victim, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts of the case and prosecution evidence against the applicant, further considering that the trial yet not commenced, without 3 commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) ami Judge AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2026.02.18 14:45:19 +0530