Facts
The applicant, Narendra Mahawar, was arrested on 11.02.2026 in connection with Crime No. 09/2026 registered at Mahila Thana, Raigarh
Source reference: para. 1, 3The complainant alleged that on 09.02.2026, while she and her sister were in their car, five individuals (including the applicant) in a Grand Vitara intercepted them twice, made obscene gestures, passed remarks, and one co-accused (Pradeep Patel) allegedly disrobed himself
Source reference: para. 2The applicant filed this first bail application on the grounds of false implication, lack of criminal antecedents, and the fact that the primary allegations of disrobing were directed at a co-accused
Source reference: para. 3The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the act and the previous rejection of anticipatory bail for other co-accused persons
Source reference: para. 4Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) considering the nature of the allegations and his period of detention
Source reference: para. 1, 6Law Applied
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding the grant of regular bail
Source reference: para. 1Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), specifically Sections 78(2) (Stalking), 126(2) (Wrongful restraint), 79 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), 75(3) (Sexual harassment), and 3(5) (Joint liability)
Source reference: para. 1Section 183 of the BNSS regarding the recording of the victim's statement
Source reference: para. 6Reasoning
The court evaluated the facts and circumstances, noting the gravity of the offense involving the interception of the victim's vehicle and the commission of obscene acts
Source reference: para. 6However, the court balanced these allegations against several mitigating factors: the applicant had been in detention since 11.02.2026, the charge-sheet had already been filed, and the applicant possessed no prior criminal record
Source reference: para. 3, 6Although the court acknowledged that the anticipatory bail of three co-accused had been previously rejected, it distinguished the present application as one for regular bail following the completion of the investigation (filing of the charge-sheet) and the recording of the victim’s statement
Source reference: para. 6Consequently, the court determined that further custodial detention was not necessary during the trial
Source reference: para. 6, 9Holding
The court allowed the application and directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties
The bail is subject to specific conditions, including an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments and mandatory presence during key trial stages [para. 8]. The court further directed the trial court to endeavor to conclude the trial within six months
Source reference: para. 9Original Court PDF
NARENDRA MAHAWARvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in