Dismissed¶23

Umesh Kumar Yadav @ Teju v. State of Chhattisgarh

Bail – Regular bail during trial – Application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 rejected

Chhattisgarh HC14 Apr 2026MCRC/3000/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur), MCRC No. 3000 of 2026, decided 15/04/2026 by Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal: first regular bail application under S.483 BNSS 2023 rejected; charges under S.65(1)/64(2)(M)/107 BNS, S.4 & 6 POCSO Act, S.3(2)(v) SC/ST Act 2012; minor victim's suicide after refusal of marriage on false pretext; bail declined on gravity of offence and trial not commenced; applicant in jail since 30.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of the offence, and taking into account that the trial has not yet commenced, the Court was not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. ¶22

Umesh Kumar Yadav @ Teju Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

Digitally signed bySOURABH SOURABH PATEL PATEL Date: 2026.04.16 10:24:38 +0530

2026:CGHC:17226

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3000 of 2026

¶6

1 - Umesh Kumar Yadav @ Teju S/o Rajaram Yadav, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Murtadand Chiparkaya Police Station Batouli District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer Police Station Batouli, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Applicant : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy.A.G.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

15/ 04/ 2026

¶15

The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 15/2026 registered at Police Station – Batouli, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 65(1), 64(2)(M), 107 of BNS and Section 04, 06 of POCSO Act and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, 2012.

¶16

As per the prosecution's case, it is alleged that the applicant/accused had committed sexual intercourse with the minor victim/deceased for about three years on false pretext of

¶17

¶18

marriage and knowing she belong to the Pahadi Korwa community, . He later refused to marry her, leading to her suicide by hanging from a mango tree in Amadab due to harassment and distress. Based on this, offence has been registered against the applicant.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. She further submits that there is a delay of 15 day in lodging the FIR. She next submits that there is no suicidal note on the place of incident and three four months ago, the deceased had attempted suicide. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in jail since 30.01.2026. Given that there is no likelihood of the case being decided in the near future, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the victim on false pretext of marriage, therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the applicant should not be enlarged on bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of the offence and taking into account that the trial has not yet commenced, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶23