1 2025:CGHC:3307 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 521 of 2025 1 - Khageshwar S/o Puran Sa Aged About 22 Years R/o Village - Sodekela, P.S. Pusaur, Distt. - Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Sariya, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Santosh Soni, Government Advocate (Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge) Order on Board 20/01/2025 1. Applicant has filed this third bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail. Second bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 02.08.2024. Applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.165 of 2023, registered at Police Station – Sariya, District – Sarangarh – Bilaigarh (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 376, 385, 509-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67-A of the I.T. Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, victim has lodged report against applicant that he has committed sexual intercourse with her and while committing sexual intercourse also made obscene photographs and video. It is further allegation that applicant has forwarded the said obscene photographs in the mobile phone of her father and has demanded money. Based on the report, applicant was arrested and during the course of investigation, mobile of applicant, his 2 Instagram ID and obscene photographs uploaded in the Instagram was seized. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that second bail application was dismissed considering submission made by learned State counsel that obscene photographs of victim was retrieved from mobile phone of applicant. He contended that this bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. There are as many as 26 enlisted witnesses in the charge-sheet, however, till September, 2024, only two witnesses have been examined. Victim was examined on 10.06.2024 and father of victim was examined on 25.09.2024, thereafter, none of the witnesses have been examined till dated. Applicant is in jail since 28.09.2023 and thereby completed about one year and four months of pre-trial detention, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant, however, he do not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for applicant with respect to number of enlisted witnesses and contents of order-sheet placed along with bail application mentioning that since September, 2024, prosecution witnesses are not turning up before trial Court for recording of their evidence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of pre-trial detention of applicant and further that applicant is in jail since 28.09.2023, there are as many as 26 enlisted witnesses out of which, only two witnesses have been examined. Prosecution witnesses are not turning up, material witnesses have been examined and there is no apprehention of influencing material 3 witnesses, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 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 his counsel. In case of his 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 her 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Shayna JUDGE Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI