Asif Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Asif Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arrested in Crime No. 725/2025 of Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, for offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m) of BNS and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, should be enlarged on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the statement of the victim, and without commenting on the merits, the Court was not inclined to release the applicant on bail, and accordingly rejected the bail application.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail refused — High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, single Bench (Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal), Order dated 18/02/2026 in MCRC No. 1368 of 2026, rejects the first regular bail application of Asif Khan (aged about 21 years) moved under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023. The applicant is in custody since 13.12.2025 in Crime No. 725/2025 of Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m) of BNS and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The prosecution case is that on 15.12.2024 the applicant lured the minor victim on the pretext of marriage and had sexual intercourse with her, thereafter threatening to make her photographs viral and continuing such acts until 06.11.2025. The parents of the victim appeared in person and recorded an objection to the grant of bail. Counsel for the applicant submitted that he was innocent and falsely implicated, noting that only 1 of 11 prosecution witnesses had been examined; State counsel opposed bail pointing to the minor age of the victim and that the already-married applicant had lured her on the pretext of marriage. Considering the prosecution evidence and the victim's statement, and expressly without commenting on merits, the Court declined to enlarge the applicant on bail and rejected the application.

1

Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHUBHAM SINGH SINGH RAGHUVANSHI RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.02.19 10:41:28 +0530

2026:CGHC:8732

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 1368 of 2026

Asif Khan S/o Farid Khan, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Padavpara, Kota, Thana Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Applicant

versus

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Respondent

(Cause-title is taken from CIS)

For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Order On Board

18/02/2026

The parents of the victim appeared in person and recorded ‘objection’ in granting bail to the Applicant.

The applicant has preferred this 1^st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 725/2025, registered at Police Station – Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence

2

punishable under Sections 64(2)(m) of BNS and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 15.12.2024, the applicant lured the minor victim on the pretext of marriage and had sexual intercourse with her. Subsequently, he threatened to make her photographs viral and continued to have sexual intercourse with her until 06.11.2025. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 13.12.2025.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits the applicant is in jail since 13.12.2025, out of 11 prosecution witnesses only 1 has been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, on the pretext of marriage he lured the victim whereas he was already married to other woman, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail.

I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and looking to the statement of victim, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

Shubham