1 2025:CGHC:242 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 6999 of 2024 Ramesh Patel S/o Heeralal Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Siladehi, Police Station Birra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, (Police of Police Station - Birra, District Janjgir Champa) (C.G.). --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 02/01/2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.88/2022, registered at PS - Birra, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.), for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that parents of the prosecutrix/victim lodged missing report to the concerned Police Station mentioning therein that her minor daughter went out from the house without intimating anything to the family members and did not return back. Based upon report, FIR was registered initially under Section 363 of IPC against 2 unknown persons. During course of investigation, prosecutrix was recovered on 25.06.2022 from Jammu Kashmir and her statement was recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C, based upon which, applicant was arrested in the aforementioned crime/offence. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. As per case of prosecution at the time of alleged incident, victim was minor, but no conclusive evidence placed on record to show that on the alleged date victim/prosecutrix was below 18 years of age. Applicant is in jail since 27.07.2024, conclusion of trial may take time as 24 witnesses have been enlisted for examination. Hence, prayed that applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes submission of learned counsel for applicant and submits that prosecutrix has levelled serious allegation against applicant in her statements recorded under Section 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. hence, he is not entitle for grant of regular bail. 5. On 18.11.2024, victim/prosecutrix alongwith her father appeared before this Court by virtual mode from concerned DLSA. She raised strong objection in granting bail to applicant. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering entire facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submission of counsel for the respective parties, objection raised by the victim in granting bail to applicant, particularly the fact that at the time of alleged incident victim/prosecutrix was minor aged about 14 years, I am not inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is hereby rejected. However, considering the detention period of the applicant ie since 27.07.2024, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the 3 trial as expeditiously as possible, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information/compliance. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J.