1 2025:CGHC:37278 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5486 of 2025 Rahul Patre @ Banty S/o Ravindra Kumar Patre Aged About 23 Years R/o Sector-5, Hospital Chauk, Road No.02, Block No.02, House No.28, Sector-06, Bhilai Nagar, Police Station - Kotwali, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station - Chhawani, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 30.07.2025 1. The victim along with her mother appeared before this Court through virtual mode from DLSA Durg 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: 2025.07.31 17:38:00 +0530 2 No.275/2024 registered at Police Station Chhawani, District Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376, 506 of IPC 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, took her to Dongargarh and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. Subsequently, on the report being made in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 22.07.2024. 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 there was delay in lodging the FIR, the victim was recovered from the possession of the complainant on 02.07.2024, the victim and her mother have not supported the case of prosecution and there are several contradictions in the victim’s 161 CrPC statement and court statement. He further submits that there are total 21 witnesses, out of which only 6 witnesses have been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 22.07.2024 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 and considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 3 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. 9. However, considering it to be an exceptional case as the applicant is in jail since 22.07.2024 and as per learned counsel for applicant, out of 21 witnesses only 6 have been examined so far, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 5 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. 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