1 2025:CGHC:29432 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3509 of 2025 1 - Victor Ekka S/o Pingal Ekka, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ghorgadi, P.S. - Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Police Station - Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 01 / 07 / 2025 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. 02/2025 registered at Police Station – Rajpur, District-Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of B.N.S. and Section 4, 6 of POCSO Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, the applicant and victim are familiar to each other and they used to talk on mobile SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.07.03 12:01:55 +0530 2 phone. In the month of January, 2023, applicant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the victim and thereafter on several occasion committed sexual intercourse with her and last time on 28.12.2024 made physical relation with the victim and thereafter denied to perform the marriage with her. Thereafter, the victim lodged the report in Rajpur Police Station and offence under Section 69 of BNS & 4, 6 of POCSO Act has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argues that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. It is further contended that the victim was a consenting party and that a dispute arose between the families when the applicant decided not to proceed with the planned marriage with the victim, leading to a false case being lodged against him out of rage. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 03.02.2025 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 opposed the bail application, arguing that the victim was aged about 16 years 05 months at the time of the incident. Additionally, the victim stated in her Section 164 statement that due to the rape committed by the applicant she got pregnant and thereafter, the applicant gave her pills for abortion, and therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 3 5. Today, victim is not present before this Court despite service of notice. 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 and the evidence against the applicant, further taking into account that the trial has not yet commenced, therefore, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected. 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 Sourabh P.