Sant Kumar Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Sant Kumar Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the second regular bail application of the applicant (in custody since 27.12.2024 in Crime No. 261 of 2024) should be allowed, considering the statements of the victim and her mother, the likely duration of the trial, and the long custody. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of counsel, the statements of the victim and her mother, the fact that the trial is likely to take time, and the long custody of the applicant, the Court inclined to release him on regular bail at this stage, expressly without observing anything on the merits of the case.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for appearance before that Court as and when directed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL (SECOND APPLICATION) – S.483 BNSS 2023 – IPC Ss.363, 366, 376(2)(n) / POCSO Ss.4 & 6 – HOSTILE WITNESSES – LONG CUSTODY: Second regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Sant Kumar Chouhan (aged about 21) in Crime No.261 of 2024, P.S. Shivrinarayan, Dist. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act; first application rejected on 16.06.2025 in M.Cr.C.No.3892/2025. Prosecution story: complainant's daughter allured and taken away on 28.06.2024 (report lodged 29.06.2024); victim recovered from the applicant's house on 27.12.2024, whereupon the offence was registered. Counsel for the applicant urged that the victim was a major and consenting party, and that after the first rejection the victim and her mother, examined before the trial Court, turned hostile, the victim categorically stating that no wrong act was committed by the applicant; custody since 27.12.2024 with only 3 of 19 witnesses examined. The State opposed, submitting the victim was minor at the time of incident and that the DNA report was positive, showing the victim and the applicant to be the biological mother and father of a child. The victim did not appear despite service of notice. Considering the hostile statements, the trial likely to take time and the long custody, the Court, expressly without observing anything on merits, allowed the application and directed release on a bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. (Paras 3–8; order dated 05.01.2026; Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal.)

1

Digitally signed by ALLENA ALLENA ANNAJEE ANNAJEE RAO RAO Date: 2026.01.06 13:59:27 +0530

2026:CGHC:481

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 10202 of 2025

Sant Kumar Chouhan S/o Shri Balaram Chouhan Aged About 21 Years R/o Vill- Kotgarh, P.S. And Tah. Akaltara, Dist- JanjgirChampa (C.G.) ... Applicant

versus

State of Chhattisgarh through- S.H.O., P.S. Shivrinarayan, Dist.Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent

For the applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)

Order on Board

05.01.2026

1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No.261 of 2024 registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan District Janjgir Champa (CG) for the offences under

2

Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.

2. The first bail application has been rejected by order dated 16.06.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.No.3892/2025

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a report was lodged by the complainant on 29.06.2024 to the effect that on 28.06.2024 his daughter was allured and taken away by an unknown person. During investigation, the victim girl was recovered from the house of applicant on 27.12.2024, therefore, the offence was registered against him.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim was a major lady and had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and she was consenting party. He further submits that after rejecting the first bail application, the victim and her mother have been examined before the trial Court and they have become hostile to the prosecution case. He refers to the statement of victim and submits that she has categorically stated that no wrong act was committed by the applicant with her. He further submits that submits that the applicant is in jail since 27.12.2024 and till date out of a total 19 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, looking to the long custody, the applicant may be enlarged on bail at this stage.

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor. He further submits that the DNA report is positive and it shows that the

3

victim and accused/application are biological mother and father of the child, therefore, offence has been committed.

6. The victim is not present before the Court despite service of notice.

7. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the statements of victim and her mother as also the fact that the trial is likely to take time and further looking to the long custody of the applicant, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him on regular bail at this stage.

8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed in that behalf.

Cc as per rules.

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

Rao