Dismissed¶¶32

Nagendra v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Bail – Regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 – First bail application

Chhattisgarh HC20 Feb 2025MCRC/416/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, 21/02/2025) rejects first regular bail application of Nagendra and Parmeshwar under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in Crime No. 268/2024, P.S. Marwahi, for offences under Sections 74, 76, 351(3), 3(5) BNS and Section 8 POCSO Act; incident dated 09.11.2024 involving alleged stopping of prosecutrix, taking her into a forest, removal of undergarments, video recording and threat to kill; applicants in jail since 11.11.2024; charge-sheet filed; bail denied on ground of serious and non-bailable nature of charges.

What did the court decide?

The charge framed against the applicants is of very serious nature and appears to be of non-bailable and serious nature. ¶¶31

Nagendra Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

2025:CGHC:9206

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 416 of 2025

¶6

1 - Nagendra S/o Harbhajan Singh Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Pendra (Patgavan), P.S. Pendra, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh

¶7

2 - Parmeshwar S/o Prem Singh Aged About 27 Years R/o Silwari (Sivni) (Patgavan), P.S. Marwahi, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Applicants

¶9

versus

¶10

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Marwahi, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Respondent

¶12

(Cause title is taken from the CIS)

¶13

For Applicants : Mr. Praveen Soni, Advocate

¶14

For State-Respondent : Ms. Prabha Sharma, PL

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

21/02/2025

¶18

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is

¶19

heard finally.

¶20

VASANTKUMAR Digitally signedby VASANTKUMARDate:2025.02.2211:22:53+0530

¶21

¶22

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.268/2024 registered at Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 76, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS & 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶23

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 09.11.2024, when the Prosecutrix was going on foot to Pathari with her friend Santosh Sonwani (a resident of Seoni), the present Applicants with their other two friends was standing on the roadside. One of them named Santosh Kenwat, asked the Prosecutrix's friend Santosh Sonwani to stop, but Santosh Sonwani left the Prosecutrix and went away from there. Then the present Applicants and their other two friends caught hold-of the Prosecutrix and took her inside the forest and with the intention of insulting her, they caught hold of the Prosecutrix's hands and arms, removed her underwear and made a video of her. When the Prosecutrix screamed, Santosh Kenwat slapped her and threatened her not to tell anyone else he would kill her. Hearing the voice of the Prosecutrix, one Mohan came, seeing whom everyone left the Prosecutrix. After that the Mohan dropped the Prosecutrix to her home. On the date of the incident, the Prosecutrix didn't share anything to anyone, but later the Prosecutrix told the whole story to her mother. After which she along with her parents went to the

¶24

¶25

PS Marwahi and lodged a report to aforesaid effect. Thereafter, on 11.11.2024 Applicants with others co-accused were arrested for the offence under Section 74, 76, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 8 of POCSO Act. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants.

¶26

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that, the applicants are innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case. He further contended that FIR was lodged after two days’ of the alleged incident, i.e., 11.11.2024. There is not a single explanation of how and why the prosecutrix has reached Pathari with her friend which falls at a distance of arount 2-3 Kms from her home. It is also contended that there is no external marks found on the body of the prosecutrix. The applicants are in jail since 11.11.2024 and the trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore the applicants may be released on bail.

¶27

Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶28

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

¶29

Considering the facts of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the fact that on the date of incident, i.e., 09.11.2024, prosecutrix was going with her friend Santosh Sonwani. On the way, the present applicants

¶30

¶31

and other co-accused stopped the prosecutrix, then Santosh Sonwani left the Prosecutrix and went away from the spot. Then the present Applicants and their other co-accused caught hold-of the Prosecutrix and took her inside the forest and with the intention of insulting her, they caught hold of the Prosecutrix's hands and arms, removed her undergarments and made a video of her and threatened her not to tell anyone else he would kill her. The charge framed against the applicants in the case is of very serious nature and appears to be of non-bailable and serious nature. Prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail.

¶32

Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No.268/2024 registered at Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-PendraMarwahi (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 76, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS & 8 of the POCSO Act, is rejected.

¶33

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

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶36

Vasant

Nagendra v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagendra v. the 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

Branch Manager, Vs Smt. Jaimuni

Harishankar Prajapti @ Rahul Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sukhdas Kosale Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khurshida Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ranjeet Markhand Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Barman Vs State of Chhattisgarh