1 2025:CGHC:35579 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5216 of 2025 Kamlesh Painkra S/o Surtu Painkra Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Ayyari Barhatoli, Thana Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Reserve Centre Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 23.07.2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 157/2024 registered at Police Station Shankargarh, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj (CG) for the offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 69, 65(1), 64(2)(m), 142, 3(5) of BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 03.09.2024 the father of the victim odged a written report that his minor daughter went missing and suspected the applicant having allured and taken her away. On which, FIR was registered and during investigation, the victim was recovered on 04.09.2024 from the possession of the applicant. On inquiry, the victim has revealed that on the pretext of marriage, the applicant had repeatedly committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.07.28 18:23:37 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was love affairs between the victim girl and the applicant and she had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and she was consenting party. He further submits that although the victim is stated to be minor, yet the evidence of correct age has not been proved. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 05.09.2024 and there are total 14 prosecution witnesses and the trial has not yet commenced, , therefore,the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the girl was minor and she was recovered from the possession of the applicant. 5. The victim along with her father has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and objected to bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the trial has not yet commenced, I am not inclined to release him on regular bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. However, looking to the long custody period of the applicant, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure that the trial is completed as early as possible. 8. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao 3