1 2025:CGHC:39089 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4938 of 2025 1 - Rohit Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Kanthiram Yadav, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 14, Akaltara, P.S. Akaltara, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Akaltara, Dist. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 06/08/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 170/2025 registered at Police Station - Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 351(3) of BNS and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 05.05.2025, the SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.08.07 10:28:21 +0530 2 mother of the victim lodged the written complainant in Police Station-Akaltara, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) alleging that on 04.05.2025, the applicant has committed unnatural sexual intercourse with his minor son. On the basis of said complaint, the applicant has been arrested for the aforesaid offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, with no connection to the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the victim's allegation is not corroborated by the medical evidence, and the applicant has been implicated only due to previous enmity between the applicant and a family member of the victim. There is a delay of one day in lodging the FIR and also in recording the victim's statement i.e., on 27.05.2025. The medical report does not support the prosecution's case. The victim and their parents have gone outside to earn a livelihood. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in jail since 27.05.2025; the charge sheet has been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, the counsel prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application, submitting that at the time of incident, the victim was about 10 years 03 months old, considering the heinous nature of the crime, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Vide order dated 27.06.2025 and 21.07.2025, notices were issued to the victim, which were returned unserved due to the 3 victim and her family members not found at the given address. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and also taking into account that the incident occurred on 04.05.2025 and the statement of the victim was recorded on 27.05.2025 i.e., after 23 days, the notices issued to the victim were returned unserved due to the victim not being found at the given address. The charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 27.05.2025, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, at this stage, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.