1 2025:CGHC:5421 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 349 of 2025 1 - Satyaprakash Kashyap S/o Jageshwar Prasad Kashyap Aged About 34 Years R/o Gangajal, P.S.- Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, C.G. … Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through- Station House Officer P.S.- Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, C.G. ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Vaishali Jeswani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate ( Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 29/01/2025 1. This is the fourth bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (C.G) for grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 72 of 2023 registered at Nawagarh, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under sections 363, 366, 376, 506 of IPC and Section 4 A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2 of the POCSO Act and section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The first bail application was dismissed on merits on 28.08.2023. The second and third bail applications were also dismissed on 07.12.2023 and 21.08.2024 after hearing on merits. While dismissing the 2nd and 3rd bail applications, the trial Court was directed to conclude the trial as early as possible by granting time twice. 3. As per the prosecution case, on 27.02.2023 complainant lodged FIR against the present applicant alleging that on 24.02.2023, the applicant seduced the prosecutrix and committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix who is stated to be aged about 14 years and belonged to Scheduled Castes. Based on such report, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.02.2023 and despite time granted earlier on two occasions while dismissing the 2nd and 3rd bail applications, the trial has not yet been concluded. She further submits that out of list of 31 prosecution witnesses, only 6 witnesses have been examined and the trial is likely to take further time. She further submits that the prosecutrix has been examined before the trial Court wherein she has admitted that the accused present in the court through VC is not the person who took her on motorcycle and had physical relations. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that out of 11 witnesses, 6 have been examined. 6. Though notice has been issued, the prosecutrix’s side has not chosen to appear nor raised any objection to grant of bail. 3 7. Considering the custody period of applicant who is stated to be in jail since 28.02.2023 and despite time granted on earlier two occasions, the trial has not yet been concluded and further looking to the statement of prosecutrix regarding identification of accused and further considering the report received from the trial Court which shows that out of 11 witnesses, 6 have been examined and 5 are yet to be examined, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 R a o