1 2025:CGHC:35211 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5236 of 2025 Sanjay Wagela S/o Jayanti Waghela Aged About 23 Years R/o Bhawisana, P.S. Garh (Wrongly Mentioned As Gah), District Banaskada Palampur (Gujrat) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Doundilohara, District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 22/07/2025 1. Father of the victim appeared virtually 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 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 45/2024, registered at Police Station – Doundilohara, District- Balod (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 & 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 5(L) & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case in short is that the applicant allegedly abducted the minor victim from her legal guardianship and on the pretext of SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.23 17:55:08 +0530 2 marriage, committed sexual intercourse with her more than once. On the basis of report lodged by father of the victim, 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 relationship between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. The victim herself went to the applicant on her own free will. The victim has examined before the Trial Court and turned hostile. Further, there is no specific evidence available on record to show her correct age. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2024, out of 33 prosecution witnesses, only 4 witnesses i.e. victim, her father and headmasters of her school have been examined and the trial 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, 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 out of 33 prosecution witnesses, as stated, only 4 have been examined till January, 2025 and the trial 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