NAFR Digitally signed INDRAJEET by INDRAJEET HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SAHU SAHU Date: 2026.01.08 17:20:19 +0530 MCRC No. 10319 of 2025

1 - Devlal Sahu S/o Bisru Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o Bansakara, Simga, Distt.

Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

... Applicant Versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh P.S. Simga, Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Applicant : Shri Devershi Thakur and Shri Bharat Loniya, Advocates.

For Respondent : Shri Karan Bahrani, Panel Lawyer.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

Order on Board

08.01.2026

1. Pursuant to the order dated 15.12.2025, the victim along with her father appeared through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised objection in granting bail to the applicant. Submission is recorded.

2. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 21.09.2025 in connection with Crime No.514/2025 registered at Police Station Simga, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, for the offence punishable under Section 74 of BNS and Sections

9,10(G),11(vi) and 12 of POCSO Act.

3. As per prosecution case, on 20.09.2025 an FIR was lodged by the father of victim with the allegation that his minor daughter was subjected to outrage her modesty by the applicant on 28.08.2025 at about 12 in the noon at Principal room of the school where his daughter had gone to study. It is also alleged that on the pretext of preparing caste and domicile certificate, the applicant called her in office room and committed the offence. The applicant is the Principal of said School where his daughter study. The incident was informed by her on 20.09.2025 and then report has been lodged for the aforesaid offence in which the applicant has been arrested.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that three consecutive FIRs have been registered against the applicant at the same time with respect to different victims. It is not possible for the applicant to take the victim outside the school in presence of other Teachers as has been alleged in their report. Highly belated FIR has been lodged and there is no explanation for such delay. There is no separate Principal Room in the school and it was a common room where the Principal and other Teachers used to sit. Totally improbable story has been developed by the prosecution only to rope the applicant in the offence in question. The applicant has made an application under The Right To Information Act to obtain certain information with respect to position of school as well as the place where alleged incident is said to have been committed, however, till date no such document has been provided to him. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime.

5. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the bail application and have submitted that minor victim have been subjected to outrage her modesty by the Principal of the school on the pretext of preparing caste and domicile certificate. Referring to Statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS they would submit that being the influential position i.e. Principal in the School, it cannot be expected from such minor student to immediately make a complaint against the Principal. It is further submitted that statement of other Teachers are also there in the charge sheet which clearly reflects involvement of the applicant in the offence in question and therefore he is not entitled for bail.

6. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties; the nature of allegation and evidence collected during investigation and also considering the age of victim and her 183 BNSS statement as also the statement of other witnesses, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

Judge

inder