1 2025:CGHC:25787 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3821 of 2025 1 - Shivlal Rajput S/o Ramsingh Rajput Aged About 25 Years R/o Kharsola, Ps. Sargaon, District Mungeli (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, P.S. Pathariya, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 19/06/2025 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 who has been arrested in Crime No. 243/2023 registered at Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act. 2. The prosecution version is that on 20.09.2023 the mother of victim has lodged a written report that on 18.09.2023 at around 7.00 pm her daughter/victim had gone somewhere else without informing anyone at home and on searching the whereabouts of the girl, she came to know A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.06.23 17:29:51 +0530 2 that some unknown person had allured and kidnapped the minor girl, on which, initially offence u/s 363 IPC was registered against the unknown person. Thereafter, during investigation when the girl was presented at the Police Station by the mother, she was recovered from her mother and on enquiry, the girl has stated that the accused took her away to Bilaspur, Raipur, Pune, Maharashtra and kept her with him and continuously subjected her physical relations, due to which, she became pregnant and gave birth to a son. Thus on the basis of girl’s statement, further offences u/s 366, 376(2)(n) and Section 4 & 6 have been added. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the age of the prosecutrix has not been proved, she was major and had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and visited many places with him without raising any alarm. He further submits that statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 CrPC wherein she has admitted the fact that she had performed marriage with the applicant and gave birth to a child, thereby she was a consenting party. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.04.2025, the trial has not yet commenced and looking to the facts situation of the case the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim girl was minor and she has supported the prosecution case in her statement u/s 161 CrPC. 3 5. On 12.06.2025, the mother along with victim girl had appeared before this Court and submitted that they have no objection if the bail is granted to the applicant. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the charge sheet has been filed and the trial has not yet commenced, I am not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao