1 2025:CGHC:27020 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4318 of 2025 1 - Satya Aanchal @ Punu S/o Dinesh Aanchal Aged About 22 Years Resident of Village Kunda, Police Station Pandariya, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh through- Station House Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For the petitioner : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Prabha Sharma, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 23/06/2025 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. 635/2024 registered at Police Station Mandir Hasaud A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.06.25 17:24:56 +0530 2 District Raipur Chhattisgarh for the offences under Sections 137(2), 64 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. 2. The prosecution story is that 18.09.2024 the brother of victim girl had lodged a written complaint stating that on 17.09.2024 his younger sister had gone to work in a shop and thereafter she did not return and the shop-keeper informed her mother that the girl had gone with with a boy. On the next day i.e., 18.9.2024 the girl came back to home and informed that on 17.09.2024, the applicant allured and took her to a secluded place near a Dhabha at village Serikhodi and committed forcible sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage and thereafter she was taken towards Raipur and on the way she was kept in Jhurmut all along the night with him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the age of the prosecutrix has not been proved and she has voluntarily accompanied the applicant and visited different places with him, therefore, she was consenting party. He further submits that out of 19 witnesses, only one witness i.e., prosecutrix has been examined and the applicant is in jail since 05.10.2024, there is no immediate disposal of the trial, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident the victim was minor and the applicant took away her and committed forcible sexual intercourse. 5. Despite service of notice on father of victim, no-body has chosen to appear either in person or through VC to make their objection or non- objection regarding grant of bail to the applicant. 3 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not feel appropriate to release him on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. However, looking to the custody period of the applicant as he is stated to be in jail since 05.10.2024 and the delay in disposal of trial, 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