Dismissed¶22

Durga Korwa v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Mar 2026MCRC/2320/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected — Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; MCRC No. 2320 of 2026; decided 24/03/2026; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Sections 332(B), 65(2) BNS; Section 5(M)/6 POCSO Act; rape and penetrative sexual assault on minor girl aged about 7 years; Crime No.170/2024 PS Balrampur; gravity of offence; victim and parents no objection via V.C./DLSA; 6 of 12 witnesses examined; depositions not filed; no comment on merits; trial to be concluded preferably within 4 months; applicant Durga Korwa; respondent State of Chhattisgarh.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicant; regular bail rejected. Trial Court directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within 4 months from receipt of the copy of the order; Office directed to send a certified copy of the order to the trial Court concerned forthwith.

Durga Korwa Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arrested in connection with Crime No.170/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 332(B), 65(2) of BNS and Section 5(M)/6 of POCSO Act, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023.

¶13

Court's answer

Bail application rejected: considering the facts and circumstances, the material available on record, the gravity of the offence, and the fact that depositions of the 6 witnesses examined (including the victim) had not been filed by counsel for the applicant, the Court declined to release the applicant on bail at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Consequential direction: since the applicant is in jail since 18.11.2024 and only 6 of 12 witnesses have been examined till date, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure its conclusion expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 months from receipt of the copy of the order.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur (single Bench, Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.), MCRC No. 2320 of 2026, decided 24/03/2026 (NAFR): Regular bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 by Durga Korwa, in custody since 18.11.2024 in Crime No.170/2024, PS Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for offences punishable under Sections 332(B), 65(2) of BNS and Section 5(M)/6 of POCSO Act, alleging rape and penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl aged about 7 years and 2 months on 17.11.2024. Bail REJECTED on grounds of the gravity of the offence, the material on record, and the applicant's counsel not filing the depositions of the 6 witnesses (including the victim) already examined — expressly without commenting on the merits — even though the victim and her parents, appearing through V.C. from the concerned DLSA, recorded no objection to bail. The trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within 4 months of receipt of the certified copy, and the Office was directed to send the certified copy to the trial Court forthwith.

2026:CGHC:14050

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2320 of 2026

¶5

1 - Durga Korwa S/o Late Khisori Korwa Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Banour, Police Station - Balrampur, District - BalrampurRamanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶6

... Applicant

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board

¶12

24/03/2026

¶13

The applicant has preferred this First 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.170/2024, registered at Police Station – Balrampur, DistrictBalrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 332(B), 65(2) of BNS and Section 5(M)/6 of POCSO Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged against the applicant that on 17.11.2024, the applicant entered the house of the complainant and committed rape and penetrative sexual assault against the innocent minor girl, who was aged about 7 years

¶15

Digitally signed by HEERALAL HEERALAL SAHUDate: SAHU 2026.03.24 17:29:12 +0530

¶16

¶17

and 2 months. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that there is a land dispute between the parties and therefore, a false report has been lodged against the applicant. He also submits that 6 witnesses, out of 12 witnesses, including the victim, have been examined. The applicant is in jail since 18.11.2024, and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶19

Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl aged about 7 years, and the medical report also supported the alleged incident; therefore, at this stage, looking to the gravity of the offence, the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶20

The victim and her parents appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA and recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant.

¶21

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

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the material available on record against the applicant and also looking to the gravity of the offence and the fact that 6 witnesses, including the victim have been examined before the trial Court, but depositions have not been filed by the counsel for the applicant, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected .

¶23

However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 18.11.2024 and only 6 witnesses out of 12 witnesses have been examined till date, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as

¶24

¶25

expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 4 month from the receipt of the copy of this order.

¶26