Chhattisgarh HC Grants Bail To Accused Man In POCSO Case, Citing Minor’s Statements With No Sexual-Assault Allegation And Her Consent

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in a case registered under Sections 137(2), 87 and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

The victim’s father lodged a missing-person complaint on 9 April 2026; the victim returned home on 14 April 2026, and her statement under Section 183 BNSS was recorded on 29 May 2026.

The applicant submitted that the victim had made no allegation of sexual assault in her statement, that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet filed, and that he had been in custody since 27 May 2026.

The State opposed bail, submitting that the victim was 15 years and 7 months old at the time and that she had allegedly been sexually exploited on the pretext of marriage.

The victim appeared by video conference and expressed consent to the applicant’s release on bail.

Section 483 of the BNSS provides the basis for the High Court to consider an application for regular bail.

The charged offences were under Sections 137(2), 87 and 65(1) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

The Court identified no precedent or further legal test; it determined the application on the circumstances before it, including the status of the investigation, the applicant’s custody, the victim’s statements and her position on bail.

The Court noted that the victim had not alleged sexual assault in either her statement under Section 183 BNSS or her statement before the Women Counseling Center.

It also considered that the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant had been in custody since 27 May 2026, and the victim had expressed consent to bail.

Although the State argued that the victim’s minority made her consent irrelevant, the Court concluded, without expressing an opinion on the merits, that the circumstances justified release on bail.

It directed that the applicant be released upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to conditions prohibiting interference with witnesses or the fair trial and requiring attendance on every date fixed by the trial Court.

The Court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application and that the trial Court must decide the case on its own merits.