01Facts
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), after being arrested in Crime No. 24/2026, registered for alleged offences under Sections 65(1), 89 and 332(B) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).
¶ 1The prosecution alleged that he sexually assaulted the victim, said to be about 15 years old, on the pretext of marriage; the victim’s mother had lodged the FIR.
¶ 2The victim and her mother appeared before the Court by video conference and consented to the applicant’s release on bail.
¶ 3The applicant had been in custody since 21 March 2026.
¶ 402Issues
i.Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail, having regard to the victim’s and her mother’s trial evidence, the victim’s stated age, and the applicant’s period in custody.
¶ 4–7ii.Whether conditions should be imposed to secure the applicant’s attendance and prevent misuse of bail during trial.
¶ 803Law Applied
Section 483 of the BNSS provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of an application for regular bail.
¶ 1The Court considered the case circumstances, including the evidence recorded at trial, the applicant’s period in custody, and the time likely required to conclude the trial, in deciding whether to grant bail.
¶ 7Provisions in the judgment · 11 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483Section 183Section 84Section 351
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 65Section 89Section 332Section 269Section 209
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4Section 6
04Reasoning
The Court gave particular weight to the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS and her trial deposition, in which she stated that she was 20 years old and did not support the prosecution; it also noted that her mother had not supported the prosecution and that the victim had denied the Public Prosecutor’s suggestions.
¶ 7Together with the applicant’s custody since 21 March 2026 and the likelihood that trial would take further time, these circumstances persuaded the Court to grant bail despite the State’s objection based on the alleged age of the victim.
¶ 5, 705Holding
The Court allowed the bail application and directed the applicant’s release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
¶ 8The order requires the applicant to avoid seeking adjournments when witnesses are present, attend court as directed, appear personally on specified trial dates, and comply with the stated consequences for non-appearance or misuse of bail.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
SHIVKUMAR @ SHIBOvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
