1 / 3 2025:CGHC:43333 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6192 of 2025 • Arvind Sahu S/o Nakul Ram Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Devri Bangla, Police Station- Devri, District- Balod, C.G. (Particular Of The Applicant Is Not Mentioned In The Impugned Order) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station- Devri, District- Balod, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 26/08/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 61/2025 registered at Police Station – Deori, District Balod (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 65(1), 308(4), 351(1)(2)(3), 49 of the Bharitya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4(2), 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on co-accused Vinay Barse on the life threat and also on threat of making photographs viral has called the victim near house of applicant. Applicant was not present there, he came later on. Upon opening of door of his house, co-accused and victim went inside the house and door was then closed by applicant and went away. Co-accused PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 thereafter took some photographs of victim and has committed forceful sexual intercourse with her. Incident was reported to the concerned police station, based on which F.I.R. was registered and applicant was arrested on 17.07.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged against him. He contended that co-accused Vinay Barse was his friend and on his request he permitted Vinay Barse and the victim to enter his house and thereafter he went away. It is not a case that applicant closed the shutter/ door from outside but from the evidence of victim before the Court, it appears that after some time Vinay Barse opened the shutter and left the victim nearby her house. No overact is alleged against applicant. He is in jail since 17.07.2025, hence, he may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would further submit that in the statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, victim made specific allegation against applicant alleging that when she entered into the house of applicant along with Vinay Barse, applicant closed the shutter and went away. 5. On 22.08.2025, pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, mother of victim appeared before this Court through virtual mode and has raised objection in grant of bail to applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for respective parties, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of 3 / 3 ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE