1 2025:CGHC:22657 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 706 of 2025 1 - Ramesh S/o Aghan Singh Aged About 29 Years Caste Yadav R/o Jogisar District- Gourela - Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Adim Jati Kalyan Thana Korba District - Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Khare, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/06/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.187/2019, registered at Police Station – Aadim Jati Kalyan Thana District – Korba (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 373, 376(D), 34 of IPC and Section 4, 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2-5) of Scheduled Caste and VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.12 11:15:35 +0530 2 Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 (as per final report). 2. As per the prosecution story, father of prosecutrix no. 1 lodged report at Police Station, Katghora, alleging therein that since 07.07.2019 the prosecutrix no. 1 & her friend prosecutrix no. 2 are missing and upon search, the prosecutrix no. 2 was found at Taraimal, Raigarh from the house of co-accused Smt. Ganga Bai from the possession of one Rajendra Meshram. The prosecutrix no. 2 informed the complainant that the prosecutrix no. 1 was taken by her aunt Smt. Ganga Bai towards Jogisar. The complainant visited twice at Jogisar, but the prosecutrix no. 1 was not found. On the basis of above report, the offence U/s 363 of IPC was registered against unknown person and during course of investigation, the prosecutrix no. 1 was recovered from Village Keshalpur and thereafter her statement was recorded, in which, she disclosed that the accused persons Ganga Bai, Aghan Singh and present applicant took her towards Chennai, where she was detained in a house and during course of detention, she was sexually exploited by other persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that on the basis of similar allegations, co-accused have already been acquitted and the entire material have already been collected by the Police and the essential ingredients of alleged offences are not attracted against the applicant. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the prosecutrix is a minor girl at the time of incident and On the basis of statement of prosecutrix no. 1, the aforesaid offences were registered against the accused persons and completion upon of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted before the learned Special POCSO Court, Katghora against Singh the accused Aghan Sinhand Smt. Ganga Bai by showing the present applicant as absconding. He also submits that the notice has been served to the victim therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and material available on record in the case diary, looking to the age of the victim and also considering the fact that victim disclosed that the accused persons Ganga Bai, Aghan Singh and present applicant took her towards Chennai, where she was detained in a house and during course of detention, she was sexually exploited by other persons. as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant– Ramesh filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No.187/2019, registered Aadim Jati Kalyan Thana District – Korba (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 373, 4 376(D), 34 of IPC and Section 4, 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2-5) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 (as per final report) is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali