1 2025:CGHC:29042 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3416 of 2025 1 - Ranjit Tandon S/o Geetadas Tandon Aged About 19 Years R/o. Kudhurtaal, Police Station Lalpur, District- Mungeli (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station Pandatarai, District- Kabirdham (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Ms. Sunita Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 30/06/2025 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. 26/2025 registered at Police Station Pandatarai, District Kabirdham (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that on 28.02.2025, on the pretext of marriage, the applicant, took the victim along with him to Hyderabad and committed Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.06.30 17:28:02 +0530 2 sexual intercourse with a minor girl who was aged about 16 years at the time of the incident. On 19.03.2025, the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the victim and her father has been examined before the trial Court who has turned hostile and do not support the case of the prosecution. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 20.03.2025, 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 applicant did a heinous crime with a minor girl who was 16 years of age at the time of incident, the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. On 25.06.2025, the victim along with her father was present before this Court and raised no objection to grant bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the applicant is in custody since 20.03.2025, only 2 witnesses i.e. the victim and her father have been examined out of 19 witnesses, the victim and her father have declared hostile and further considering the fact that the victim and her father have no objection to grant bail to the applicant, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, I am inclined 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 H.L. Sahu