1 2025:CGHC:26943 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3261 of 2025 1 - Shrawan Kumar Markandey S/o Late Pannalal Markandey Aged About 39 Years R/o Village - Sirri Chowk, Birejhar, Police Station - Kurud, District - Dhamtari (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Kurud, District - Dhamtari (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Richa Dwivedi, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 23 / 0 6 / 202 5 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. 344/2024 registered at Police Station – Kurud, District – Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) of IPC/65(M), 65(1) of B.N.S. and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.06.23 17:50:11 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 05.08.2024, the complainant, mother of the victim lodged written complaint to the effect that she came to know two months ago that her daughter stomach was visible and on 05.08.2024, during the examination by the doctor, it was found that the victim is 8 months pregnant and on being asked to victim, she disclosed that when the she (complainant) used to go for work, during that time around 12:00 pm, the applicant came to her house on 18.12.2023 and committed sexual intercourse with her several times. Based on this offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. She next submits that no such offence has been done by the applicant as the DNA test is found negative which shows that the applicant is not the biological father of the infant. She also submits that the applicant is in jail since 18.08.2024, and 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 opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has clearly supported the case of the prosecution. He also submits that the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor 3 girl, due to which she became pregnant at 32 weeks, and there are 23 listed witnesses in this case; therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. The victim along with her mother, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and raised their objection to grant bail to the applicant. 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, the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of crime, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 8. However, the 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 H.L. Sahu