1 2025:CGHC:24488 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3143 of 2025 • Arun Kashyap S/o Shri Shrawan Kashyap, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Kanhaiband Fatak Para Chouki Naila, P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 16 / 06 / 2025 1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 1015/2024 registered at Police Station – Janjgir, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of BNS and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act. SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.06.17 17:42:00 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 30.12.2024, the victim lodged a written complaint alleging that on 29.12.2024 at about 6;00 pm, she went to the Naila Road overbridge. At about 8:00 Pm, while she was conversing with her family members, a boy arrived at the scene and forcibly took her under the canal bridge, crossing the railway line. He threatened to kill, switched off her mobile phone, and committed forcible sexual intercourse. Upon returning from the spot, she encountered Harnish and Mayank, informed them about the sexual assault. She then returned home and informed her family members about the incident. Based on the written complaint, the police has arrested the applicant and has registered the case for the offences as mentioned above. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submits that as per the complaint, the unknown person has committed the aforesaid offence but on next day she has made named FIR, therefore, the story of the prosecution is clearly a concocted story. He next submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 31.12.2024. There is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that victim has supported the case and out of 15 witnesses only 02 witnesses have been examined till date and there are some important witnesses still remained 3 for examination, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Despite service of notice, victim is not appeared before this Court today. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record and the evidence against the applicant, further considering the fact that out of 15 witnesses only 02 witnesses have been examined and some important witnesses are still remaining for examination, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected. However, concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.