1 2025:CGHC:32577 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3354 of 2025 Dharmendra Verma S/o Tijauram Verma Aged About 23 Years R/o Vill Amlikapa, P.S. Jarhagaon, Dist- Mungeli (C.G.). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer (S.H.O.), P.S. Jarhagaon, Dist- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Ankur Seth, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Shivank Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) (Order on Board) 14.07.2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 33/2024 registered at Police Station Jarhagaon, District Mungeli (CG) for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(i)(n) of IPC and Section 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.07.15 11:03:38 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case is that on 12.02.2024 the victim’s father lodged a report on 09.02.2024 at about 10.00 am his daughter left home to go to school and she did not return home, on which, a crime has been registered against an unknown person. During the investigation, on 01.02.2025, the victim was recovered from the possession of the present applicant and when the girl was inquired, she has stated that the applicant took her away to Raipur and Hyderabad where he committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the age of the prosecutrix has been differently shown in the Aadhar Card and the entry made in Certificate, therefore, the correct age has not been proved. He further submits that prosecutrix had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and visited with him from one place to another and she was a consenting party. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 01.02.2025 and till today, out of 16 witnesses, only 3 witnesses have been examined including the victim and her parents and the victim has become hostile to the prosecution case. He submits that there is no immediate possibility of disposal of the case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the girl was minor at the time of incident and the applicant took away the girl from lawful custody of her parents and committed forcible sexual intercourse. 5. On 08.07.2025, the victim girl along with her mother appeared through VC and recorded no objection to grant of bail. 3 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao