Allowed

Dileep Toppo v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC27 Jan 2026MCRC/10474/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First regular bail application under BNSS Section 483 for arrest in a POCSO/BNS case. The victim and her mother had turned hostile; the victim raised no objection to bail; only two of fourteen witnesses examined and the applicant was in custody since November 2025. Bail was granted with a personal bond of Rs. 25,000.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of like sum, subject to appearing before the trial Court on every date.

Dileep Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

2026:CGHC:4670

¶3

Digitally signed by SOURABH SOURABH PATEL PATEL Date: 2026.01.28 18:18:14 +0530

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10474 of 2025

¶5

NAFR

¶6

1 - Dileep Toppo S/o Shivmangal Toppo, Aged About 24 Years, Occupation- Educated Unemployed R/o Village Lau P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, P.S. Gandhinagar, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Applicant : Mr. Pavas Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. N.K. Sinha, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, G.A.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

28/01/2026

¶15

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 638/2025, registered at Police Station -Gandhinagar District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(M) of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act.

¶16

2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant committed

¶17

¶18

sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on multiple occasions. On a report being made in this regard, an offence was registered against the applicant, leading to his arrest.

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, with no connection to the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the victim and her mother have been examined and turned hostile. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 12.11.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.

¶20

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application, submitting that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, out of 14 witnesses only 02 have been examined till date and there are some important witnesses still remain for examination, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail.

¶21

5. Today, victim appeared from the concerned DLSA and raised her no objection in granting bail to the applicant.

¶22

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

¶23

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and also taking into account that victim and her mother have turned hostile during examination. Today also, victim has virtually appeared and raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant. The applicant is in

¶24

¶25

jail since 12.11.2025, out of 14 witnesses only 02 have been examined till date, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶26

8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case.

¶27

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

¶28

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶29

Sourabh P.

Dileep Toppo v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dileep Toppo v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yash Balani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kt (Juvenile in Conflict With Law) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prakashchand Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Boman Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satya Om Prakash Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohd. Shahim Vs State of Chhattisgarh