1 2025:CGHC:41115 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5990 of 2025 Roshan Nishad S/o Bhulau Nishad Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Bhanwarmara, Police Station Arjuni District- Dhamatari Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Arjuni District- Dhamatari Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri,Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/08/2025 1. The victim along with her mother appeared virtually through 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 Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.08.14 16:55:40 +0530 2 crime No. 62/2025, registered at Police Station – Arjuni, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 64 (2)(m) of BNS, U/s 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 26.04.2025 the minor victim lodged a report in concerned Police Station stating therein that on 28.02.2025, the applicant called and said her that he loves her and behind the bus-stand in an agricultural field, he committed forceful sexual intercourse with her without her consent. Thereafter, on 01.03.2025, he again committed sexual intercourse with the victim due to that she became pregnant. Based on above, 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. He further submits that there was a love relationship between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. The DNA report is still awaited. The applicant is in jail since 27.04.2025, out of 21 prosecution witnesses, only 1 has been examined till date and the trial is likely to some 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 and due to the act of the applicant, she became pregnant, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, 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. 3 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of offence, at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham