1 2025:CGHC:22958 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4063 of 2025 1 - Sachin Gupta S/o Manoj Gupta Aged About 21 Years R/o Chalgali, P.S.- Chalgali, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through P.S.- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Navneet Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunita Manikpuri, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 10/06/2025 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. 15/2025 registered at Police Station Ramanujganj District A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2 Balrampur Ramanujganj for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and sections 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. As per the prosecution case, the victim and accused came to be acquainted with each other at Tatapani fair in the year 2023 and thereafter they used to talk on mobile. On 02.01.2024, the applicant accused took the minor girl to Ambikapur on the pretext of marriage and kept her in a rented house for six months at Ambikapur and during this period, the applicant had committed sexual intercourse on several times. Thereafter, the accused dropped the victim to her house and again he took her away to some other places where he committed sexual intercourse. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the report was filed with the delay of 1 year and 1 month and there is no explanation for such inordinate delay in lodging the FIR on 01.02.2025 . He further submits that prosecutrix had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and both they were residing together in a rented house for six months and when the marriage was denied by the mother of applicant, the report was filed. He also submits that the medical report does not support the prosecution case regarding the age of prosecutrix. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.02.2025 and looking to his period of custody, he may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that on pretext of marriage, the applicant has 3 continuously committed sexual intercourse with the victim girl who was aged about 16 years and 3 months and eventually he refused to marry the victim saying that she belonged to a different caste. He further submits that the trial has not yet commenced as such the victim girl could not be examined. 5. It appears that despite service of notice on mother of victim, nobody has chosen to appear on victim’s side to record their objection for grant of bail. However, a perusal of the trial Court order dated 04.04.2025 shows that the victim’s mother has opposed the prayer for grant of bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and further considering the facts situation of the case, I am not inclined to allow this bail application. Accordingly, it is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao