1 2025:CGHC:42920 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6668 of 2025 1 - Anand Sarkar S/o Shri Sakti Sarkar Nishad Aged About 24 Years R/o Delhi Vikashpuri Indira Camp No. 03 Wz-65/98, Thana Vikaspuri District New Delhi Present Address Baraita, Thana Kasba, District : Purnia, Bihar ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Pakhanjur, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shreyansh Pathak, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. T.S. Sahu, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 25/08/2025 1. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 09.02.2024 in M.Cr.C. No. 618/2024. 2. This bail application is filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 03/2022 registered at Police Station – Pakhanjur, District – North Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 376 (2) (1) (n), 506, 376/114, 120-b, 342, 212, 315/511, 376 (DA) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 04, 05 (1) 4 & 06/17, of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the instant crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that this bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. The prosecution witnesses i.e. mother of the victim and her friend are not turning up for recording their evidence since 02.08.2024 which is evident from the copy of the order-sheets till April, 2025 filed by the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that the first bail application was dismissed on merits 09.02.2024 in M.Cr.C. No. 618/2024. There is prima-facie evidence available in the case-diary against the applicant. Hence, he is not entitled for bail. 5. Upon asking learned counsel for the applicant upon the evidence available, he fairly submits that the victim is examined before the learned Trial Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 7. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, documents enclosed along with the bail application, reasons recorded for dismissing the first bail application, I do not find present to be a fit case to allow the application for grant of bail. 8. However, taking note of the fact that the aforementioned witnesses are not turning up for recording evidence since August, 2024, Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and take all necessary measures for causing presence of the witnesses as provided under the B.N.S.S., 2023. 9. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-d/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey