Chattisgarh High Court
Kishan Patel vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 May, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:21812
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2776 of 2025
Kishan Patel S/o Late Ramnarayan Patel Aged About 27 Years R/o Rajak
Mohalla, Mangla, P.S. Civil Lines District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil
Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
For Applicant : Mr. Wasim Miyan, Advocate
For Respondent/State : Mrs. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Order on Board
09/05/2025
1. Pursuant to the order dated 08.04.2025, the notice issued to the
victim has been served upon her, but neither the victim appeared in
person or through virtual mode before the Court nor any
representation is made on her behalf to make submissions on the
bail application of the applicant. Since the applicant is in jail since
Digitally
signed by
VEDPRAKASH
21.01.2025, therefore this Court proceeds to hear the bail
VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN
DEWANGAN Date:
2025.05.10
17:31:49
+0530 application.
2
2. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail. The applicant has been arrested in connection with
Crime No. 1140 of 2024, registered at Police Station Civil Lines,
District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2),
351(2) 3(5), 333, 64(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short
‘BNS’) and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act‘).
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.11.2024, the mother of the
victim lodged a report to the police that on 19.11.2024, when she was
in her house, the applicant along with his wife came to her house,
started quarreling with her, that due to her previous report, they have
spent more than Rs. 10 lakhs in the legal proceeding and asked to
pay the same, or else they would get her video viral. When she
protested, the applicant inserted his private part in the mouth of her
minor son and abused her. The applicant and his wife have assaulted
his minor son and her also. The FIR has been registered on
19.11.2024 for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5)
of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act. During the investigation, the
applicant has been arrested on 21.01.2025 and charge sheet has
been filed.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that this is the third
report lodged by the mother of the victim against the applicant, the
first report was lodged on 27.06.2024 for the offence under Section
376 of IPC, in which the applicant was granted regular bail on
02.09.2024 by the High Court. Thereafter, on 07.09.2024, the mother
3of the victim again lodged another report under Sections 296, 115(2),
351(2) and 333 of BNS, in which the applicant was again arrested
and he was again released on bail on 08.11.2024. After releasing the
applicant from jail, she again made a report on 21.11.2024 with
respect to the incident of 19.11.2024. The mother of the victim kept
the applicant somehow in the custody, for which she is repeatedly
lodging the report against him.
5. Considering the conduct of the mother of the victim, the applicant has
filed CRMP No. 216 of 2025 challenging the action of the mother of
the victim and challenging the registration of the FIR, which was
disposed of by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, reserving the
liberty to the petitioner. He would also submit that on 21.11.2024, the
wife of the present applicant has made a complaint to the I.G. police
and on 14.09.2024, the family members of the applicant as well as
persons of the vicinity have made a joint complaint to the
Superintendent of Police with respect to the conduct of the victim.
6. He would further submit that the victim is indulged in lodging
repeated reports against the present applicant. He would also submit
that the FIR itself is wrong, as the applicant has remained in jail on
her two earlier reports made by the victim and therefore there is no
question to again went to her house and committed the offence with
her minor son. The applicant is in jail since 21.01.2025, final
adjudication of the case will take its own time and therefore he may
be enlarged on bail.
4
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has
submitted that on the report made by the mother of the victim, the
FIR has been registered against the applicant, in which she disclosed
the commission of the offence with her minor son. Injuries have been
found on the body of the victim as well as the complainant. Looking
to the previous reports also, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
parties, considering the nature of allegations and the material
collected during the investigation, further considering that in two
earlier complaints made by the mother of the victim, the applicant
has been enlarged on bail and considering the manner in which the
alleged offence is said to have been committed and the controversy
between the parties, further that the applicant is in jail since
21.01.2025, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
10. Consequently, the present application filed by the applicant for grant
of regular bail is hereby allowed.
11. 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 concerned trial Court, on
following conditions:-
(i) He shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
5acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court.
(ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.
(iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and
every date given to him by the concerned trial Court
till disposal of the trial.
Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)
Judge
ved