1 2025:CGHC:23863 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2986 of 2025 Sunil Rajwade S/o Late Shri Vineshri Rajwade Aged About 19 Years R/o Umeshpur Urchuma, Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Patna, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 13/06/2025 1. The victim along with her parents appeared through virtual mode from concerned DLSA before this Court today and recorded her 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. 321/2024, registered at Police Station – Patna, District- Koriya (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 87 of BNS and U/s 4, 6 of the POCSO Act. Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.06.13 17:18:10 +0530 2 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that the accused/applicant Sunil Kumar Rajwade lured the victim under the false pretext of marriage, took her with him to Surajpur and Ambikapur. On the same day, the accused took the prosecutrix from Ambikapur to Chirmiri, where he kept her for one day and one night. During this period, the accused Sunil Rajwade committed rape upon the victim. Thereafter, on 15.11.2024, he abandoned the prosecutrix outside her brother-in-law’s house and absconded. 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 went to the applicant on her own will. The applicant is in jail since 18.12.2024, out of 18 prosecution witnesses only 4 have been examined till date 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 at the time of incident, the victim was minor. Therefore, 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, nature of offence and further considering that 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