1 2025:CGHC:26386 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3346 of 2025 • Arvind Jatav S/o Karuva Jatav, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Nanauri Tehsil Bhatnawar P.S. Kohri District - Shivpuri (M.P.). ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer City Kotwali District - Mungeli (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Dr. Arpit Lall, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Mr. G.L. Uikey, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 20/06/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of BNS and Section 4 & 6 of POCSO, 2012 Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.02.2025, mother of the victim lodged a report at Police Station City Kotwali SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.06.20 16:55:08 +0530 2 against unknown person stating that on 27.02.2025, she had gone to work in the field and when she returned home her daughter (victim) was not at home, and on searching, she couldn’t found. On the report of complainant, the offence was registered against the unknown person at police station City Kotwali. During the investigation, on 08.03.2025, the victim was recovered from the custody of present applicant and he has been arrested for the aforesaid offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and has no connection with the offences charged against him. It is further contended that at the time of incident, victim was major. Further the victim and her mother have turned hostile and not support the case of the prosecution. He next submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 12.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant and at the time of incident, victim was minor and out of 26 witnesses only 03 witnesses have been examined till date and there are some important witnesses still remain for examination, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Today, victim and her mother appeared before this Court and 3 have raised their no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and also considering the fact that the victim and her mother have turned hostile and today also they appeared before this Court and raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant. Notably, the Applicant is in custody since 12.03.2025 and out of 26 witnesses, only 03 witnesses have been examined till date, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.