1 2025:CGHC:11985 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1661 of 2025 Raju Mahto S/o Bipat Mahto Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Taraimal, Police Station Punjipathra, District Raigarh (C.G.) (Address Of Applicant Is Mentioned In The Case As R/o. Fattepur, Bilauna, P.S. Aurai, District Mujaffarpur (Bihar), At Present R/o. N.R.T.M.T. Plant, Punjipathra, Police Station Punjipathra, District Raigarh (C.G.) .. Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Punjipathra, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate For Respondent/State :Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 213/2023, registered at Police Station- Punjipathra District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(A)(B) of Indian Penal Code and Section 06 of the POCSO Act. 2 2. Brief facts of this case is that on 22.08.2023 at about 11;00 PM the applicant committed sexual assault with the minor victim aged about two years. The incident was reported by her mother to the concerned Police Station upon which the aforementioned offences was registered and thereafter the applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that, the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. After the rejection of the first bail application the parents and other prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. The applicant is in jail since 22.08.2023 and it will take sufficient time for the trial to be concluded. It is also pertinent to mention that the applicant are having two minor children, they are suffering from financial crises. Hence he pleads to grant bail to the applicant in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case and other materials available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the nature of offence, and the evidence available on record it is crystal clear that the applicant is involved in the crime and there are clinching chain of evidences which proves the same. This court finds that there are no substantial ground of circumstantial changes . Therefore, this court is of the considered opinion that this case is not a fit case to allow the bail application of the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant miscellaneous criminal appeal stands dismissed. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial as soon as possible, if no legal impediment. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza