1 2025:CGHC:30904 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4418 of 2025 Jay Vasudev S/o. Subhash Vasudev Aged About 20 Years R/o. Village - Chourega, Police Station Simga, Dist. Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) .. Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Simga, Dist. Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Agrawal, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 07/07/2025 1. Despite service of notice to the victim, none appeared on behalf of the victim. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 219/2025, registered at Police Station – Simga, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 & 64 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 24.04.2025, the complainant/ father of the victim lodged a missing report of the victim stating that on 22.04.2025 at 04.00 am, his minor daughter (victim), aged 15 years and 03 months, went somewhere from her home without informing SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.08 11:41:55 +0530 2 anyone. On receiving the information, missing person report was registered. During the investigation, after tracing the kidnapped girl and the unknown accused, the kidnapped girl was recovered from the possession of the accused Jai Vasudev on 24.04.2025 and on interrogating the victim, she told that the accused had lured her by promising to marry and abducted her and forcibly had physical relations with her. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. There was a love affair between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 24.04.2025, the trial is not commenced till date and is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor. She supported the case of prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, the nature of offence and the fact that Trial has not commenced till date, at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham