1 2025:CGHC:23866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3015 of 2025 Sagar Thakur S/o Aghanu Thakur Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Machaud, P.S. Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Vivek Mishra, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 13/06/2025 1. Father of the victim appeared through virtual mode from concerned DLSA before this Court today and recorded 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. 238/2024, registered at Police Station – Gunderdehi, District- Balod (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2) & 65 (2) of BNS and U/s 3/4 (2) of the POCSO Act. Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.06.13 17:18:09 +0530 2 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that the victim was a minor girl of about 16 years of age on the date of the incident. The accused, knowing that the victim was a minor girl of less than 18 years of age, lured and kidnapped her without the consent of legal guardian and established physical relations with her more than once and committed penetrative sexual assault. 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 medical evidence of the case has not supported the case of prosecution. Allegation against the applicant is that he went along with the victim to Dongargarh and stayed with her. The applicant is in jail since 17.10.2024, out of 29 prosecution witnesses only 2 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