1 2025:CGHC:17248 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2904 of 2025 Suneel (Sunil) Shrivastava S/o Late Ramswarup Shrivastav Aged About 38 Years R/o Devnandan Nagar Phase 01 Sarkanda P.S. Sarkanda Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Thana Sarkanda Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 460/2024 registered at Police Station Sarkanda Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376 (D) of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.01.2024, it has been alleged that the applicant alongwith another co-accused persons have forcible established physical relationship with the victim, thereafter, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and subsequently, he was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 20.08.2024, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that the trial of the applicant has already been concluded. However, the trial of the co-accused, Sitaram, who was absconding, is still pending, charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 23.04.2024, in spite of the time being granted to conclude the trial, the same has not yet been concluded only because of the co-accused, hence, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant alongwith another co- accused, Sitaram have forcible established physical relationship with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of X Vs. State of Rajasthan and another in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 13378 of 2024 decided on 27-11-2024 has observed in the said order that.- "14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused." 15. Over a period of time, we have noticed two things, i.e., (i) either bail is granted after the charge is framed and just before the victim is to be examined by the prosecution before the trial court, or (ii) bail is granted once the recording of the oral evidence of the victim is complete by looking into some discrepancies here or there in the deposition and thereby testing the credibility of the victim.” 16. We are of the view that the aforesaid is not a correct practice that the Courts below should adopt. Once the trial commences, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion which may either result in the conviction of the accused or acquittal of the accused. The moment the High Court exercises its discretion in favour of the accused and orders release of the accused on bail by looking into the deposition of the victim, it will have its own impact on the pending trial when it comes to appreciating the oral evidence of the victim. It is only in the event if the trial gets unduly delayed and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, the Court may be justified in ordering his release on bail on the ground that right of the accused to have a speedy trial has been 4 infringed." 8. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 in MCRC No. 5815 of 2024 on the ground that the applicant alongwith another co-accused, Sitaram tried to outrage the modesty of the victim by taking advantage of her illness, the trial is in progress, looking to the seriousness of the allegation levelled against both the accused persons to be involved in a gang rape case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 9. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant-Suneel (Sunil) Shrivastava, involved in Crime No. 460/2024 registered at Police Station Sarkanda Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376 (D) of IPC, is rejected at this stage. 10. As the co-accused, Sitaram has already been arrested and his trial is also started, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the said co-accused expeditiously. 11. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil