### Grant of Bail Due to Absence of Criminal Antecedents and Alleged Delay in Filing FIR

The applicant, Narsingh, was arrested on February 2, 2026.

The arrest followed an FIR registered at Police Station Agar for allegedly making obscene gestures and inappropriately touching the prosecutrix on December 3, 2025, and December 7, 2025.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

He argued that he was falsely implicated due to a property dispute, noted a four-day delay in the FIR, and highlighted that the investigation was complete with the final report already filed.

The State opposed the bail based on the gravity of the offence but conceded the applicant had no criminal antecedents.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations, the completion of the investigation, and his lack of criminal history.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail.

The court also considered Sections 74 (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 75(1), 78(1), 79, 296(b), 351(3), 332(c), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Procedurally, the court referenced Section 346 of the BNSS (formerly Section 309 CrPC) regarding the timely examination of witnesses during trial.

The court reasoned that since the final report has been filed and the investigation is complete, the applicant's continued incarceration is no longer necessary for the purpose of investigation.

The court observed that the applicant is a 40-year-old agriculturist with established family roots and no criminal history, reducing the risk of him fleeing from justice or committing further offences (recidivism).

It noted that the offence is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) and is not of a "heinous or brutal" nature that would affect society at large.

Furthermore, the court found no evidence suggesting the applicant is capable of influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence.

The holding is contingent upon several conditions, including regular appearance at trial, the prohibition of committing similar offences, and a strict mandate against tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses.

The court clarified that the trial court may cancel bail if any conditions are breached.