1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5500 of 2025 Arvind Kumar Das S/o Shri Surendra Das Aged About 23 Years R/o Village- Madarpur, Thana -Dumariya, Distt- Gaya (Bihar) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Gandhinagar Ambikapur, Distt- Surguja (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 22.07.2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared before this Court today through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and expressed their no-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 No.649/2024 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.24 18:02:47 +0530 2 87, 64(2)(m) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of 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. On report being made in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 13.11.2024. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the victim and her mother have been examined before the trial Court and they have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. The victim and her father have also given their no-objection in granting bail to the applicant. He further submits that out of total 16 witnesses, only 6 witnesses including the victim and her parents have been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 13.11.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest, therefore, 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, she was recovered from the possession of the applicant 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. 3 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. 9. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Khatai JUDGE