1 2025:CGHC:16298 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2712 of 2025 1 - Banvari Singh S/o Late Atibal Singh Aged About 55 Years R/o At Present Adarsh Colony Village Janakpur, Thana-Janakpur, Tahsil-Bharatpur, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G. ...Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Sho, Janakpur, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Amiya Bhushan, Advocate For Respondent/State :Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07.04.2025 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. 228 of 2024, registered at Police Station- Thana Janakpur, Mahendragarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 70(2), 49, 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 5(g), 17 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(ii)(v) of SC and ST Act. First bail application of the 2 present applicant was rejected by this court vide order dated 18.02.2025. 2. Brief facts of this case are that, as per the case of the prosecution on 26.11.2024 a report was lodged by the mother of the victim alleging that on 15.11.2024 three accused namely Kushal Singh, Ashok Kachwaha and Ravendra Kushwaha who are the teachers of the school of the prosecutrix/victim committed gang rape with her daughter and threatened her for dire consequences. Thereafter, again on 22.11.2024 when the victim was going to purchase some household articles, accused Kushal Singh came in the motorcycle and took her to a rented room of the present applicant in the name of giving information with relation to the exams. Thereafter, Kushal Singh and Ashok Kachwaha again committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. On the basis of the above allegation the accused persons were 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. He further contended that the applicant is a Forest Ranger posted in Janakpur, District Mahendragarh-Chirmiri Bharatpur C.G. and the only allegation against the present applicant is that he has provided accommodation to the other co-accused 3 persons. He stated that there is no evidence on record that the present applicant has committed any offence as alleged by the mother of the victim and even if the entire case of prosecution is taken as it is, no offence is made out against the present applicant hence, he may be released on bail. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this court for granting bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant by stating that there is an active role of the applicant in the present case and all the incriminating circumstances of the case somehow shows the involvement of the present applicant. Moreover the offence committed by the accused persons are serious in nature and cannot be taken on consideration. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at lenght, perused the case and other materials available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the nature of offence, particularly to the fact that the offence was committed on a school girl by the accused persons who are said to be the teachers of the same school in which she is studying and not only once but twice. 4 Although the present applicant was not a teacher of the same school but there is a clear evidence that the applicant has provided accommodation to the other co-accused in order to rape the victim once again, and the mother of the victim has clearly alleged that he too has committed sexual intercourse with her daughter/prosecutrix which is a very heinous crime, therefore, this court is of the considered opinion that the present case is not a fit case for allowing the Second bail application of the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the present MCRC stands rejected. 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