1 2025:CGHC:22746 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2353 of 2025 • Jamuna Prasad Khunte S/o Lt. Nohar Khunte Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Mohadi, P.S. Sarkanda, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Ranjan Tiwari, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy.G.A. For Victim Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 09/06/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 767/2024 registered at Police Station Kota, District SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.06.10 17:24:31 +0530 2 Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2) (f), 65(1), 351(2) of BNSS and 3/4(2), 5(a)(ii)/6 of POCSO Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 17.09.2024, an FIR has been lodged by the minor prosecutrix against the applicant under Sections 64, 351(2) of BNSS and 6 of POCSO Act. The allegations are that on 26.07.2024, the prosecutrix, after returning home from school, found her house locked. Then she went to the house of the applicant, which is located near her residence, as the applicant is her maternal grandfather. It is alleged that the applicant forcefully committed rape upon her. The prosecutrix reportedly did not disclose the incident to anyone immediately. She allegedly informed her mother (co- accused) about the incident after returning home, but her mother did not pay attention to it. It is further alleged that two months later, in September 2024, when the prosecutrix started vomiting and was taken to a doctor, it was discovered that she was pregnant. Only then did she inform her family members about the incident, revealing that she was pregnant as a result of the alleged sexual assault by the applicant. Consequently, the offence was registered and the applicant was arrested on 19.09.2024. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further argued that the applicant has no connection with the offences charged against him. A deliberate and false case has been registered against the present applicant as part of a deliberate 3 conspiracy. He further submits that no evidence on record to prove the involvement of the applicant in the said alleged offence and there are several contradictions in the statement of prosecutrix. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is aged about 70 years old and is in jail since 19.09.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that there is specific allegation against the present applicant and at the time of incident, the prosecutrix was aged about 13 years. Hence, the present applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the victim also opposes the bail application of the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record and also considering the fact at the time of the incident, the victim was a minor girl below 14 years of age. At this stage, by considering the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court does not deem it fit to grant bail to the applicant/accused. 8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected. However, concerned trial Court is 4 directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.