Damandip Tandan @ Raja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:225

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 9937 of 2025

¶6

1 - Damandip Tandan @ Raja S/o Kisun Tandan, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Fardfod, P.S. Devri (wrongly mentioned as Deori in the covering page of impugned order), District Balod Chhattisgarh

¶7

2 - Ayush Tandan @ Raj, S/o Kisun Tandan, Aged About 18 Years (age has wrongly not been mentioned in the covering page of impugned order), R/o Fardfod, P.S. Devri (wrongly mentioned as Deori in the covering page of impugned order), District Balod Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Applicants

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Devri, District Balod Chhattisgarh (P.S. name wrongly mentioned as Deori in the impugned order)

¶11

... Non-applicant

¶12

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶13

For Applicants :	Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate.
For State/Non-applicant :	Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri	Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board

¶14

02-01-2026

¶15

Pursuant to the order dated 05-12-2025 the father of the victim appeared through virtual mode from DLSA Balod and raised objection in granting bail to the applicants. His objection is taken on record.

¶16

Heard on the application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicants for grant of regular bail. The applicants have been arrested on 02-09-2025 in connection with Crime No.128/2025 registered at P.S. - Devri,

¶17

Digitally signed byMOHAMMEDAADIL KHAN Date: 2026.01.0218:08:43 +0530

¶18

2

¶19

District Balod (C.G.) for the offence under Section 126(1), 74, 78, 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNS, 2023) and Section 7/8, 11(1)/12, 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’) (as mentioned in the present bail application).

¶20

The case of prosecution is that, on 01-09-2025 the father of the victim lodged a report to the police with effect that his minor daughter is being subjected to outrage the modesty by accused persons between 26-08-2025 to 01-09-2025 when she was going to school and when she informed the incident to her teacher, the accused persons came to his house and threatened them with dire consequences. The incident was repeated on 01-09-2025 also and then the report has been lodged. The FIR for the offence under Sections 126(1), 74, 78, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 8 of POCSO Act has been registered and after investigation charge sheet has been filed.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the victim had fallen down on the road while going to school and coincidentally the applicants were present at that place and it is only on apprehension that they outraged the modesty of the victim the report has been lodged against them. The applicants are the persons belonging to the same age group. There is no criminal antecedent against them. The victim and her father have already been examined before the trial Court and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. The applicants are in jail since 02-09-2025. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation and further considering the nature of allegation against the present applicants and that they are in jail since 02-09-2025 as also the fact that the victim and her father have already been examined before the learned

¶24

3

¶25

trial Court, without commenting anything on merits of the case I am inclined to release these applicants on bail.

¶26

Consequently, this application filed by the applicants for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, on the following conditions :-

¶27

(i) they 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court ;

¶28

(ii) they shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

¶29

(iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial unless their personal presence is exempted by the trial Court.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

¶32

Judge

¶33

Aadil

Damandip Tandan @ Raja v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Damandip Tandan @ Raja 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

Dushyant Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahendra Kumar Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahendra Bain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yogendra Sharma @ Lal Maharaj @ Bharra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sumit Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahendra Mittal Vs Ajay Singh