1 2025:CGHC:40003 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5692 of 2025 1 - Durgesh Ratre S/o Chetan Ratre Aged About 24 Years R/o Village - Basin, Police Station - Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. A.D. Kuldeep, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 08 / 08 / 2025 1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 283/2024 registered at Police Station – Fingeshwar, District – Gariyaband (C.G.) for the offence punishable Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.08.11 10:21:02 +0530 2 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 06.09.2024, complainant, father of the victim lodged a report stating stat his daughter/victim without intimating to her parents went outside from the house. After searching for their relatives and neighbours, she did not find out. After that, it came to know that one Durgesh Ratre/applicant gave false assurance of marriage, took the minor victim with him and her to his house and committed sexual intercourse with her. Due to which the victim conceived pregnancy and she blessed with a child at Community Health Center, Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the statement of the victim was recorded before the Court under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. in which she stated herself that she performed marriage with the applicant and after marriage she was blessed with one child and both are living happily as husband and wife. He also submits that the victim is a consenting party, the applicant is in jail since 11.09.2024, charge sheet has been 3 filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a missing report was lodged by the father, and subsequently, he came to know that the applicant committed the heinous offence with a minor girl, due to which she became pregnant and gave birth to a child. There is sufficient evidence against the applicant. Therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. The victim, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and recorded no objection to grant bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of offence, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 8. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 11.09.2024, the concerned trial Court is directed to 4 expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu