Allowed

Priyanshu Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026MCRC/5706/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to the applicant arrested under the POCSO Act. Relying on the victim's contradiction of prosecution testimony and her expressed consent, the Court ordered release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 pending trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on execution of personal bond of Rs. 50,000 subject to standard conditions of not tampering with witnesses and appearing for investigation.

Priyanshu Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.09.17 10:38:59 +0530

¶2

¶3

CGHC010221962026 2026:CGHC:40396

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 5706 of 2026

¶7

Priyanshu Patel S/o Puran Lala Patel Aged About 21 Years R/o Mudipar, Police Station Gatapar District Khairagarh-ChuikhadanGandai Chhattisgarh (Details Of Applicant Properly Not Mentioned In Impugned Order Sheet)

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station - Deori District Balod Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Non-applicant

¶12

For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L.

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

16.09.2026

¶16

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. 66/2026 registered at Police Station : Deori, DIstrict Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(M) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

¶17

¶18

2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant lodged a complaint at Police Station Deori, alleging that the victim was a minor below 18 years of age and applicant knowing this fact very well that she was a minor, committed sexual assault on false promise of marriage. On this basis, a First Information Report was registered, and during the course of the investigation, the applicant was arrested on 16.04.2026.

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a 21-year old innocent boy who has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that prosecutrix has been examined before the learned Trial Court where she has not supported the case of prosecution. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 16.04.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

6. It transpires that victim appeared before this Court on 12.08.2026 through video conferencing and submitted that she has no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 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 the applicant has been in jail since 16.04.2026, 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

Priyanshu Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanshu Patel 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