1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5217 of 2025 1 - Lilesh Kumar Vishwakarma S/o Late Tumman Vishwakarma Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Arand, Police Station Rajim, District Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Tumgaon, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 13.08.2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared before this Court today through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised objection in granting bail to the applicant. 2. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.08.14 12:00:16 +0530 2 No.171/2024 registered at Police Station Tumgaon, District Mahasamund (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m), 69, 87 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 3. As per the prosecution case, the applicant knowing fully well that the victim was a minor, kidnapped her from the lawful guardianship of her parents and committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. Subsequently, on report being made in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 03.12.2024. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the victim has been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. He submits that the victim was a consenting party and she went with the applicant of her own will. He further submits that out of total 20 witnesses, only the victim has been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Therefore, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 5. State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident, therefore, her consent is of no relevance/consequence. She further submits that due to the said offence, the victim became 3 pregnant and considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai