1 2025:CGHC:23152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2950 of 2025 Kanha Sahu S/o Rajesh Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Nayapara, Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Of Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rupendra Kumar Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/06/2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared before this Court today and recorded her no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 290/2024, registered at Police Station – Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 323, 294 and 376 (2)(n) of the IPC and Section 3/4 (2) and Section 5 (ठ)/6 of the POCSO Act. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 07.04.2024, the applicant allegedly abducted the minor victim without the consent of her lawful Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.06.12 15:13:31 +0530 2 guardian, for the purpose of committing sexual intercourse. It is further alleged that he repeatedly committed rape with the victim and upon the victim’s refusal, the applicant abused her verbally and physically assaulted her. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the victim was a consenting party as there was a love affair between the applicant and the victim. The victim herself joined the company of the applicant and stayed with him. Further, the applicant is in jail since 12.09.2024 and the trial is likely to some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. Out of 18 witnesses, some witnesses have been examined and some remain to be examined. Hence, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and further considering that some important witnesses are remain to be examined, at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham