Allowed¶23

Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC27 Jan 2026MCRC/475/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MCRC No. 475 of 2026; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; decided 28/01/2026; Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh; regular bail; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Section 376(2)(n) IPC; Section 6 POCSO Act; Crime No. 271/2025 PS Surajpur; aggravated penetrative sexual assault on minor; victim delivered dead child 03.06.2025; custody since 06.06.2025; 3 of 27 witnesses examined; DNA report pending; personal bond Rs. 25,000/-; bail allowed; NAFR marking.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted: release upon furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court; applicant to appear before the trial Court on every date till disposal of the trial; certified copy ordered to be sent to the trial Court. ¶23

Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 271/2025 (offences under Section 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act). +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

Considering that the victim, her mother and her father have already been examined before the trial Court, that the applicant has been in custody since 06.06.2025, and that the trial is likely to take considerable time, the Court decided to release the applicant on bail at this stage, expressly without commenting on the merits of the case.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed: the applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶23

Key takeaways

Conditions of release: the applicant must appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed by that Court till disposal of the trial, and it is made clear that any observation made in this order shall not affect the trial of the case.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Regular bail under S. 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 sought for an applicant aged about 19 years arrested in Crime No. 271/2025, P.S. Surajpur (Dist. Surajpur, C.G.), for offences under S. 376(2)(n) IPC and S. 6 POCSO Act, arising from an allegation of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor on 18.04.2024 resulting in pregnancy and stillbirth on 03.06.2025. Bail allowed: of 27 listed witnesses, 3 (victim, her mother, her father) already examined without incriminating statements; applicant in custody since 06.06.2025; trial expected to take considerable time; State's objection (DNA report not received) overborne. Release ordered without commenting on merits, on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum, subject to appearance on all trial dates; Court's observations not to affect the trial. Single Judge: Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; order dated 28/01/2026; no one appeared for the victim though notice served.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 475 of 2026

¶4

1 - Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh S/o Ghuran Singh Aged About 19 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Titarkhad Kaskela Police Outpost Latori P.S. Jainagar District Surajpur (C.G.)

¶5

... Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer Police Station Surajpur District Surajpur (C.G.)

¶8

... Respondent

¶9

For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For State : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, P.L.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶11

Order on Board

¶12

28/01/2026

¶13

Digitally signed by HEERALALSAHU HEERALAL SAHUDate:2026.01.28 17:14:14 +0530

¶14

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. 271/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

¶15

¶16

2. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that on 18.04.2024, the applicant committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault by having sexual intercourse with the minor victim more than once, due to which the victim got pregnancy and gave birth to a dead child on 03.06.2025. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

¶17

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that out of 27 listed witnesses, 3 witnesses, including the victim, her mother and her father, have been examined, who have not stated anything incriminating against the present applicant. The applicant is in jail since 06.06.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant.

¶18

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the DNA report has not received, and the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl, due to which the victim got pregnant and delivered a dead child; therefore, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail.

¶19

5. No one appeared on behalf of the victim, though notice has been served.

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the victim, her mother and her father have been examined before the trial Court, the applicant is in custody since 06.06.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶23

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. The 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.

¶24

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

¶25

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶26

H.L. Sahu

Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

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

Dileep Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Boman Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satya Om Prakash Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh