Allowed

Kailash Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026MCRC/5584/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to an applicant arrested for offences under POCSO and SC/ST Act. The court relied on the victim's subsequent denial of prosecution's case and the applicant's lack of antecedents, directing execution of a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted on execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000; directions to remain available for interrogation and refraining from obstructing the trial.

Kailash Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.09.17 10:26:04 +0530

¶2

¶3

CGHC010229352026 2026:CGHC:40399

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 5584 of 2026

¶7

Kailash Sahu S/o Late Duryodhan Aged About 23 Years R/o Ward No. 48, Mission School Road, Boirdadar, Panchwati, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mahila Thana Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant

¶11

For Applicant	: Mr. Pawan	Kesharwani, Advocate
For Non-Applicant	: Ms. Ritika	Verma, P.L.

¶12

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

16.09.2026

¶15

1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 4/2026 registered at Mahila Thana, District : Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(M), 351(2) and 115(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST (P.A.) Act.

¶16

¶17

2. The prosecution story in brief is that applicant met the victim in November, 2023 and developed an acquaintance. On 27.12.2023, applicant, despite knowing that victim was a minor aged about 17 years and 10 months, established physical relations with her against her will and consent on the false promise of marriage. Applicant allegedly maintained repeated physical relations with the victim under the continued deception of marriage until 21.01.2026. It is further alleged that whenever the victim insisted on formalizing their marriage, the applicant refused, subjected her to physical assault, and extended threats to her life. On the basis of the victim's complaint, police registered offence as stated above and arrested the applicant.

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a 23-year old innocent boy who has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that prosecutrix has been examined before the learned Trial Court where she has deposed that she has performed marriage with the applicant and they are staying together. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 23.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

¶19

4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present applicant/accused lured the minor girl and sexually assaulted her

¶20

¶21

on the pretext of marriage, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail.

¶22

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

¶23

6. Though, the victim appeared before this Court on 29.07.2026 through video conferencing and raised objection in releasing the applicant on bail but considering the facts and circumstances of the case and from perusal of the evidence of the victim recorded before the learned Trial Court, it appears that victim has not supported the case of prosecution and denied the suggestions put forth by the public prosecutor. Also considering the fact that applicant has been in jail since 23.01.2026, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶24

7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶25

(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

¶26

(b)he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; and

¶27

¶28

¶29

The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits.

¶30

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶31

A j i n k y a

Kailash Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Sahu 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