-1- 2025:CGHC:19034 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2835 of 2025 Channu Lal Uikey S/o Nihali Ram Uikey Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Pendalkuhi, Police Station- Chilhati, District - Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chauki (C.G.) ... Applicant (s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Chilhati, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chauki (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anuj Kumar Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 28/04/2025 1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with Crime No.69 of 2022 registered at Police Station –Chilhati, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chauki (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 376 (3), 376-D (A), 450, 452, 34 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.04.29 14:00:37 +0530 -2- 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.10.2022, applicant came to the house of the victim at about 05:00 P.M. and committed sexual intercourse with her. At the time of commission of offence, father of the victim came to the house and caught him red-handed and thereafter, the report was lodged by the complainant. Based upon which, the aforementioned crime was registered and applicant was arrested on 15.10.2022 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence as alleged. The applicant and the prosecutrix had a love affair. Co-accused Jeetu Uike has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 13.12.2023 passed in MCRC No. 8051 of 2023. The applicant is in jail since 15.10.2022, hence, he may also be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that applicant is the main accused against whom allegation of committing sexual intercourse is levelled and the prosecution witnesses have supported the case of prosecution. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that till date, only 9 witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. 6. Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, victim along with her father appeared before this Court and have raised objection in -3- grant of bail to applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed along with the bail application. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the applicant and further considering the submission of learned counsel for the State based on documents enclosed along with bail application, I do not find present to be a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. 9. Application is according rejected. However, considering the period of detention of applicant since 15.10.2022, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen