1 2025:CGHC:31027 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4395 of 2025 Ganesh Das Manikpuri S/o Raghuvar Das Manikpuri (Wrongly Mentioned As Raghuveer In The Certified Copy) Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Sanakpat, Police Station Fasterpur, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Palari, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent/State For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate For State : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 07.07.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.33/2025 registered at Police Station Palari, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) (M) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.08 14:45:40 +0530 Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.08 14:46:28 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, a missing report of the victim was lodged by her father on 21.01.2025 and she was recovered on 28.01.2025 from the possession of the applicant at Pune. The allegation against the applicant is that he knowing fully well that the victim was a minor, kidnapped her from the lawful guardianship of her parents, took her to Pune and committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the victim was a consenting party and she had gone to the applicant of her own free will. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.01.2025, only 5 witnesses have been examined till date out of total 17 witnesses and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the victim was a minor at the time of incident, therefore, her consent is of no relevance/consequence. She submits that the victim in her court statement has supported the case of prosecution and considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 5. No one appeared for the victim/prosecutrix/complainant, despite service of notice. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant and also considering the statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. 3 9. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai