Anticipatory bail granted considering facts, nature of dispute, and material available.

The applicant, Bhagauram Kewart, filed a first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 854/2025.

The crime was registered at Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for offenses under Sections 333, 74 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

The prosecution's case is based on a report filed by the victim's father on December 26, 2025.

He stated that on December 25, 2025, while he and his wife were at work, their elder minor daughter was alone at home.

The daughter reported that on December 25, 2024, the applicant questioned her about her family's whereabouts and then followed her home.

While she was preparing for a bath, the applicant allegedly entered the house, grabbed her arms, pressed her chest and breasts, and molested her.

She screamed, escaped, and ran towards a new pond, after which the applicant ran away.

The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated, citing a prior quarrel between the complainant's and applicant's families on the day of the incident.

They contended that the complaint was lodged to falsely implicate the applicant and save the complainant from his own acts.

The applicant, a 52-year-old Sarpanch and neighbor, claimed his family was assaulted by the complainant, and their attempts to file a report were refused.

His daughter subsequently filed a complaint with the Superintendent of Police.

1. Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Bhagauram Kewart in connection with Crime No. 854/2025 registered under Sections 333, 74 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act?

The court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which pertains to anticipatory bail, alongside the provisions of Sections 333 and 74 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, which govern the alleged offenses.

The court also considered the general principles for granting anticipatory bail, including assessing the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the dispute, and the material available in the case diary.

The Court considered the submissions of both the applicant's counsel, who asserted the applicant's innocence, the existence of a prior quarrel between the parties, and the alleged false implication, and the State counsel, who opposed the bail application.

The applicant emphasized his status as a 52-year-old Sarpanch, his adjacent residence to the complainant, and financial hardship for his family if arrested.

He also highlighted the non-appearance of the victim's father or DLSA counsel despite notice.

Without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, the Court found it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail after reviewing the facts, circumstances, nature of the dispute, and the case diary.

The discretion to grant anticipatory bail was exercised in light of these considerations, implying that the conditions for arrest apprehension were met while mitigating factors warranted pre-arrest protection.

It was held that in the event of arrest, the applicant, Bhagauram Kewart, shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and one local surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

The bail was granted subject to specific conditions, including not inducing or threatening persons acquainted with the facts, not acting prejudicially to a fair trial, appearing before the trial court, submitting identification documents, and not engaging in similar offenses in the future.