1 2026:CGHC:20450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.3421 of 2026 Heerasingh Yadav S/o Shri Laxman Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Ghatkarra, Police Station Panduka, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer In Charge, Police Station Panduka, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant :Ms. Jaya Gupta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State :Ms. Nand Kumari Kashyap, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 01.05.2026 1. This is the 1st bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the Applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.05.01 17:32:28 +0530 2 No.129/2025 registered at Police Station – Panduka, District Gariyaband for the offence under Sections 137(2), 87 & 64(2)(m) of BNS, under Section 6 of POCSO Act as also under Section 3(2) (v) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that a report was lodged alleging that the minor victim went missing and upon investigation the police found that she was taken away by the Applicant, who committed rape on her. It is alleged that the minor victim belongs to Scheduled Tribe category and therefore, offences as mentioned above, have been registered against the present Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that no ossification test report has been placed on record by the prosecution, the Applicant and the victim were known to each other, he is behind the bars since 19.12.2025 and the trial is likely to take quite some time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the school certificate of the victim regarding her age has been placed before the trial Court, which reflects that she was a minor at the time of the incident. It is further 3 submitted that the Applicant had forcibly taken her away from the lawful custody of her parents. 5. Victim appeared from concerned DLSA along with her parents through Video Conferencing and did not raise any objection with respect to granting bail to the Applicant. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the nature and gravity of offence, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the Applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Priya