1 2025:CGHC:17771 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2285 of 2025 1 - Bhuvneshwar @ Bubne S/o Astu Baghel Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Jharumargaon, Tyusgudapara, P.S.- Kotwali Jagdalpur, Distt.- Bastar (C.G.) ... applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, P.S.- Kotwali Jagdalpur, Dist.- Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ramsanjiwan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on board 17.04.2025. 1. Heard, This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 15/05/2024 in connection with Crime No. 178/2024 registered at P.S. Kotwali, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (CG) for the offence under Section 363, 366- A, 376 (3) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 15/04/2024, the mother of the victim has lodged a missing report to the Police that her minor daughter is missing since 12/04/2024. The Police has registered the offence under Section 363 of IPC and started investigation. During the investigation, the victim has recovered on 14.05.2024 and after recording her statement, the other offences under Section 366 A, 376 (3) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act have been added. The applicant has been arrested on 15/05/2024, and charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim is a major girl, having love affair with the applicant and she herself had gone with the applicant without raising any objection. She resided for a considerable period and engage in making consensual physical relation with the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 15/05/2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that the applicant is the brother-in-law of the victim, he took the victim on the pretext that he procured male child from her. The victim is a minor girl having sexually exploited by the applicant who has already married and therefore, he is not entitled for bail. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation, particularly considering the relationship between the victim and the applicant as well as the age of the victim, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 3 6. Consequently, the application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail is hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.04.22 10:03:11 +0530