1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7191 of 2025 1 - Ajay Sandilya S/o Raghunath Ram, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Khutanpara, Rajpur, Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. This is the third bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the material witnesses vide order dated 03.04.2025 passed in MCRC No. 568/2025. The second bail application of the applicant has also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in MCRC No. 5717/2025, thereafter, the third bail application has been filed. 2. The applicant who is arrested on 21.05.2024 in connection with Crime No. 195/2024, registered at P. S. Rajpur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 450 of IPC and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.09.17 10:51:44 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the material witnesses and now the material witnesses have been examined, the applicant is in jail since 21.05.2024. There are material discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, therefore, he filed the second bail application. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes and submitted that on the date when the first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn, the victim has already been examined as PW- 1 before the learned trial Court on 25.10.2024, but it transpires thereafter, the applicant did not disclose in the present bail application, therefore, he is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering that nature of allegation and further considering that at the time of dismissing the first bail application of the applicant on 03.04.2025, the victim has already been examined on 25.10.2024 as PW-1 before the learned trial Court and no other material has been annexed with the bail application by the applicant as to how many witnesses have been examined till date, I am not inclined it to consider the change in circumstances. 7. In view of the above, the third bail application of the applicant is dismissed at motion stage itself. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok