YOHAN MINJ vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010345772026 2026:CGHC:45314
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8402 of 2026
1 - Yohan Minj S/o Munna Minj, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village -Kudar
Baswar, Chowki Kedama, P.S. -Udaipur, District - Sarguja (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Ambikapur, District -Sarguja
(C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate
For Non-applicant
: Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L.
/State
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
27/10/2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been
arrested in connection with Crime No. 59/2026, registered at Police

2
Station Ambikapur, District – Sarguja (C.G.) for offence punishable
under Sections 137(2), 87, 5(L) and 64(2)(m) of BNS and Section 6
of POCSO Act.
2. As per the case of the prosecution, FIR was lodged by the victim
after attaining the age of majority on 29/01/2026 to the effect that
the present applicant, on the pretext of marriage, sexually
assaulted her on several occasions from 20/03/2021 to 29/09/2025
and subsequently, refused to marry her. On the said complaint,
police registered the aforesaid offence against the present
applicant.
3. Mr. Sunil Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, would argue
that there was a love affair between the applicant and the victim
and the relationship between them was consensual in nature. He
would further submit that from 20/03/2021 to 29/09/2025, the
applicant and the victim stayed together at Mumbai for a period of
one month and at Ambikapur for one week. It is also argued that
the applicant was ready to marry but the victim herself refused and
lodged a false complaint against the applicant. He would lastly
contend that investigation has been completed, charge-sheet has
already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 12/06/2026 and
he has no criminal antecedents, thus, he be released on bail as
conclusion of trial is likely to take some time.
4. On the other hand, Ms. Priya Sharma, learned counsel appearing
for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application and

3
submit that at the time of the incident, the victim was a minor aged
about 16 years and 1 month and therefore, the contention of
consent of the victim would be irrelevant. She would further submit
that serious allegations have been levelled against the applicant
with regard to sexual assault of the minor victim, therefore, he is not
liable to be released on bail.
5. Victim appeared before this Court through video conferencing from
the concerned District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and raised
serious objection in grant of bail to the applicant.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary as well as the material available on record.
7. Having considered the fact that there was a love affair between the
applicant and the victim and from 20/03/2021 to 29/09/2025, they
stayed together at various places like Ambikapur and Mumbai and
further considering that there is a delay of 4-5 years in lodging FIR
and there is no explanation for the said delay and lastly considering
that charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has no criminal
antecedents and he is in jail since 12/06/2026, this Court, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is of the
considered view that a fit case for grant of regular bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant is allowed .
8. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on

4
bail, on following conditions :-
(i) 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,
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair
and expeditious trial, and
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date
given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
9. The observation made herein-above is for the purpose of deciding
this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its
own merits.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Harneet