1 2025:CGHC:23158 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3730 of 2025 1 - Mahesh Banjare S/o Shri Manak Lal Banjare Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Pardeshikapa Police Station Chilfi District - Mungeli (C.G.) (Name Corretly Mentiones ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer Police Station Chilfi District - Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent For the appellant : Mr. Parasmani Shrivas, Advocate For the State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 11/06/2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 164/2024 registered at Police Station Chilfi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh for the offences under Sections 137(2), 64(2) (m) A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 20212. 2. The prosecution version is that the father of victim girl has lodged missing report in P.S. Chilfi stating that his minor daughter 16 years and 6 months had gone to somewhere else and when she did not return, they searched for the girl but could not trace out her. It is alleged that during the course of investigation, the girl was recovered from the possession of the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the statements of prosecutrix recorded u/s 161 & 164 CrPC, there was love relations between the applicant and victim and she had voluntarily accompanied the applicant. He further submits that when the victim was found during investigation, both they were living together as husband and wife after performing the marriage at a temple, therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. He also submits that the parents of the victim have stated her age to be 19 years, therefore, the prosecutrix is a major lady and even the prosecution authorities did not seize any relevant documents under the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 08.02.2025 and till date, out of 26 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and the trial will take time, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor girl and she was recovered from the possession of applicant. 3 5. The complainant along-with victim has appeared through VC and has not objected to grant of bail to the applicant. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and further considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate to release him on regular bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao