Bhupendra Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 June, 2025

Chattisgarh High Court

Bhupendra Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 June, 2025

                                                1




                                                                 2025:CGHC:22737
                                                                                 NAFR

                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                    MCRC No. 3405 of 2025

      1 - Bhupendra Yadav S/o Malikram Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Rahangi, Police
      Station Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                              ... Applicant
                                             Versus
      1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur,
      Chhattisgarh.
                                                                           ... Respondent

For Applicant : Mr. Aakash Singh, Advocate along with Mr. Swapnil
Keshari, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate
SB: Hon’ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
09/06/2025

1. This is the third bail application. The second bail application was

dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 07.04.2025 in M.Cr.C. No.

2725/2025. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide

order dated 05.12.2023 in M.Cr.C. No. 7801/2023.

2. This bail application filed by the applicants under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as

they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 428/2023

registered at Police Station – Torwa, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh for

the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 and under Sections 04 & 06 of the Protection of Children
SHUBHAM
DEY from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

Digitally
signed by
SHUBHAM
DEY
2

3. Case of prosecution is that, on 15.08.2023, the father of the victim lodged

a missing report in the concerned police station stating that his daughter

has not returned home from school. During the course of investigation,

victim was recovered along with the applicant from Pune. After recording

the statement of victim under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., the applicant was

arrested on 17.08.2023 and the other offences were also added.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent,

he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any

offence as alleged. He submits that the material witnesses have not been

examined and therefore, there is no averment of commission of offence

as alleged against the applicant. There are contradictions in the

statement of victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C.

Applicant is in jail since 17.08.2023, hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made

by the counsel for the applicant and would submit that in the statement of

the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C, there are

specific allegations against the applicant of committing forceful sexual

intercourse with the minor child.

6. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim along with her mother

appeared before this Court through virtual mode from D.L.S.A. Bilaspur,

District – Bilaspur and they raised objection in grant of bail to the

applicant.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the

documents filed along with the bail application.

8. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of

allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties,

period of pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of

the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.
3

9. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that

applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in

the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction

of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that:

(a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek
any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are
present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial
court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with
law.

(b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed,
either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without
sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial andin order to
secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and
the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such
proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the
dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording
of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court
absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall
be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and
proceed against him in accordance with law.

10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court

concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified

copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey