SURAJ KADAM vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Digitally signed
by AJINKYA
PANSARE
Date:
2026.10.28
10:47:00
+0530
1

CGHC010258242026 2026:CGHC:45278
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 6035 of 2026
 Suraj Kadam S/o Shri Ramnath Kadam Aged About 32 Years By
Caste Kurmi, R/o Village - Murmunda, Thana And Tahsil -
Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
versus
 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of
Police Station Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate
For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, P.L.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
27.10.2026
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.
130/2026 registered at Police Station : Dongargarh, District :
Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296,
126(2) and 75(1)(i) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w Section
12 of POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(b)(i) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act.

2
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.03.2026, when the
minor victim had gone to the market to purchase vegetables, she
was intercepted by the applicant, who was in an intoxicated state.
It is alleged that the applicant verbally abused and molested the
minor victim. Thereafter, the victim returned home and narrated
the incident to her family members. Subsequently, the father of
the victim lodged an FIR, and the aforesaid offence was
registered against the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case on account of previous
enmity with the victim’s father. He further submits that though the
applicant has four previous criminal antecedents pertaining to the
years 2015, 2017 and 2022, the applicant has been acquitted in
all those cases or the cases have been disposed of. He contends
that the victim has been examined before the learned Trial Court,
where she has not supported the case of the prosecution. He
further contends that the applicant has been in jail since
20.03.2026 and the conclusion of the trial may take some time,
therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the present
applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the present application and submits that the present
applicant/accused verbally abused and molested the minor victim,

3
therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. It transpires that victim appeared before this Court on 19.08.2026
through video conferencing and submitted that she has no
objection for grant of 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. Although the
applicant has four prior criminal antecedents pertaining to the
years 2015, 2017 and 2022, none are of a similar nature;
moreover, all such cases have either resulted in acquittal or have
been disposed of, and the details thereof have been duly
explained in the present bail application. Also considering the fact
that applicant has been in jail since 20.03.2026, 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.
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:-
(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation
by the police officer as and when required;

4
(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
(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.
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.
- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
A j i n k y a