1 2025:CGHC:35210 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5215 of 2025 Shambhu S/o Ramkhelavan Nai, Aged About 40 Years R/o Ghutr, P.S. Manendragarh, Dist. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Manendragarh, Dist. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 22/07/2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared virtually 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. 05/2025, registered at Police Station – Manendragarh, District- M.C.B. (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 (ड) & 142 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that the applicant allegedly assisted co-accused Sandeep, who abducted a minor girl and confined her in the applicant’s house from January 7, 2025, to January 11, 2025, SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.22 18:07:21 +0530 2 where the co-accused committed wrongful acts against 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. In this case, the main accused is Sandeep. No role has been played by the applicant in the crime in question. The only allegation against the applicant is that the victim has heard him name from the co-accused. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.01.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial has 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 the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 & 183 of BNSS, supported the case of prosecution. Further, she was recovered from the house of the applicant and at the time of incident, she was minor, therefore, 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, detention period of the applicant and the fact that there are total 18 witnesses in this case and as stated, the trial has not commenced till date and is likely to take time to be finalized, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 9. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham