1 2025:CGHC:32260 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4513 of 2025 Indralok S/o Vijay Singh Aged About 20 Years R/o Village - Kuppi, Chowki - Kudargarh, Police Station - Odgi, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Sonhat, District - Korea (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/07/2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared through virtual mode from concerned DLSA before this Court today and recorded ‘objection’ in granting bail to the applicant. 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. 07/2025, registered at Police Station – Sonhat, District- Korea (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 137(2), 87 & 64(2)(ड), 88/56, 296, 351(2) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that the victim was introduced to the accused on Holi. After that, the accused started talking to the victim on the phone and started talking about liking the victim and marrying her. He called the victim behind the house 2-3 days after the festival of Holi in the year 2024 and taking her to Kudargarh. He brought her back to SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.11 17:44:15 +0530 2 village Ghughra from Kudargarh and had physical relations with the victim near the Shiva temple on the same night. After 3-4 days, he came to the victim's village and had physical relations with her again. After this, the accused Indralok continued to have physical relations with the victim till August 2024 due to which the victim became pregnant. 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. On the date of incident, the victim was more than 18 years of age. Father of the applicant has also made accused in this case. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 13.03.2025, out of 18 prosecution witnesses, only 2 have been examined till date and the trial 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 and became pregnant as a result of the sexual intercourse, 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 and evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, 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. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham