Chhattisgarh HC Denies Bail To Three Accused In Alleged Prostitution Racket Involving A Minor, Citing Repeated Sexual Exploitation

The three applicants sought regular bail in Crime No. 265/2025, registered for offences under Sections 98, 3(5) and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

The prosecution alleged that the victim, aged 17 years and 10 months at the relevant time, was repeatedly sexually exploited and sent to different persons for money.

The charge-sheet had been filed. Lakhvinder Kaur and B. Keshwan Reddy sought second bail, while Anand Kurre sought bail for the first time. B. Keshwan Reddy’s earlier application had been rejected on merits; Lakhvinder Kaur’s earlier application had been withdrawn.

The victim appeared before the Court with her brother and opposed bail.

The applications were considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides for the High Court’s and Court of Session’s power to grant bail.

The alleged offences were under Sections 98, 3(5) and 64 of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

In considering bail, the Court assessed the nature and gravity of the allegations, the victim’s age, the material collected during investigation and the circumstances of each applicant; it also considered whether a substantial change in circumstances warranted a different decision on a renewed bail application.

The Court considered the allegations to disclose repeated sexual exploitation of a minor over a period of time, involving several persons and locations, and relied on the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS.

As to Lakhvinder Kaur, the victim’s reference to “Lucky,” a co-accused’s memorandum statement and call-detail records indicating communication with the applicant were sufficient, at the bail stage, to prevent the Court from disregarding the alleged connection; the evidentiary value of that material was left for trial.

As to B. Keshwan Reddy, the victim had allegedly named him, and the Court found no substantial change in circumstances warranting departure from the earlier merits-based rejection.

As to Anand Kurre, the specific allegation that he repeatedly took the victim in his car and had sexual relations with her, considered alongside the victim’s age and the nature of the allegations, outweighed the fact that the charge-sheet had been filed and he had been in custody.

The Court also took account of the victim’s objection to release.

The Court made no final determination on guilt; it left the assessment of the evidence to trial.