Dismissed¶24

Salman Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Jul 2025MCRC/3617/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, MCRC No. 3617 of 2025, decided 04/07/2025 by Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal: first regular bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 of Salman Khan (accused, aged about 24) in Crime No. 315/2023, P.S. Sipat, Bilaspur, under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act — bail rejected on merits despite custody since 07.05.2023 and part-tried record; trial Court directed to conclude trial preferably within 3 months.

What did the court decide?

Considering the entire facts and circumstances, particularly the material available on record and the evidence against the applicant, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage; the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected. ¶24

Salman Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

2025:CGHC:30709

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 3617 of 2025

¶6

1 - Salman Khan S/o Late Abdul Gaffar Khan Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Charpara Pandhi, Thana Sipat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, District Bilaspur, Police Station Sipat, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Applicant : Mr. Prashant Singh, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

04/ 07/ 2025

¶15

The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 315/2023 registered at Police Station – Sipat, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

¶16

Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.07.05 11:52:32 +0530

¶17

¶18

As per the prosecution’s case, the victim was studying in the 9th class. During this time, she was acquainted with the accused/appellant, the appellant had asked the victim for marriage, after which, on 04.05.2023, he called the victim near Lord Shani temple and had made physical relations with her. Further, it is alleged that from 05.05.2023 to 06.05.2023, the appellant took the victim to village Lagra and made physical relations more than once. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 07.05.2023, only 16-17 witnesses out of 22 witnesses have been examined till date, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail.

¶21

The parents of the victim, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA, and on being asked, they raised objection to grant bail to the applicant.

¶22

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶24

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record and the evidence against the applicant, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is

¶25

rejected .

¶26

However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 07.05.2023, it is an exceptional case, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from today.

¶27

Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶28

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶29

H.L. Sahu

Salman Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Gani Vs Sameer Rahmani

Maniram Kuswaha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amirchand Kujur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Karan @ Dularelal Agariya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sachin Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh