Bail granted where the complainant has no objection, chargesheet is filed, and the accused has no criminal antecedents.

The applicant was arrested on 1 August 2026 in connection with Crime No. 292/2026 registered at Police Station Pali, District Korba, for offences under Sections 74, 76, 78 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The prosecution alleged that on 29 July 2026 at approximately 11:00 p.m., when the victim went into the courtyard to attend nature’s call, the applicant entered the courtyard and attempted to outrage her modesty.

The victim lodged a written report on 30 July 2026, following which the FIR was registered and investigation commenced.

The applicant filed his first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), contending that he had been falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedents, and that the charge-sheet had been filed.

The victim also appeared before the Court and filed an application and affidavit stating that she had no objection to the applicant being granted bail.

The State opposed the application on the ground that the applicant had attempted to outrage the victim’s modesty.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in view of the nature of the allegations and the circumstances of the case.

Whether the applicant’s period of detention, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the victim’s no-objection to bail justified the grant of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, which empowers the High Court or Court of Session to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody.

The Court considered the nature and gravity of the alleged offences under Sections 74, 76, 78 and 351(3) of the BNS, along with established bail considerations such as the period of custody, criminal antecedents, completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and the likelihood of the trial taking time.

No judicial precedent was cited or relied upon.

The Court considered the allegations that the applicant had attempted to outrage the victim’s modesty, but balanced their nature and gravity against the applicant’s custody since 1 August 2026, his lack of criminal antecedents, and the filing of the charge-sheet.

The Court also took into account that the victim had personally appeared and submitted an affidavit expressing no objection to the grant of bail, a circumstance which was also reflected in the trial court’s bail-rejection order.

Since the investigation had concluded and the trial was likely to take time, the Court held that continued detention was not warranted and that the applicant was entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring the applicant not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court, to appear personally on specified significant dates, and to comply with the consequences prescribed in the event of absence or misuse of bail.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for compliance.