1 2025:CGHC:32262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4741 of 2025 Sunil Kumar Yadav S/o Gulabchand Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Village - Marma Bajnapara, Out-Post- Dindo, P.S. Trikunda, District - Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Police Station - Trikunda, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/07/2025 1. The victim along with her sister appeared through virtual mode from concerned DLSA before this Court today and recorded ‘no 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. 18/2025, registered at Police Station – Trikunda, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 376 (2)(n) of IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.11 17:44:13 +0530 2 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on the night of 15.06.2023, the victim had gone to her village to attend the marriage ceremony of her friend and the applicant/accused Sunil Yadav also came there and at 4 a.m. the applicant/accused took the minor victim from the marriage venue to the nearby forest and raped her. Thereafter, the applicant/accused, knowing the victim to be a member of the Scheduled Tribe, raped her more than once at different times and places thereafter refused to marry the victim. 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 due to dispute taken place between them, a false report has been lodged by the victim against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.04.2025, the trial has not commenced yet 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, 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 and the fact that the trial has not yet commenced, 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