1 / 3 2025:CGHC:44947 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6653 of 2025 • Rahul Vaishnav Son of Ishwar Vaishnav Aged About 19 Years Resident of Village Tenduwahi, Police Station Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 03/09/2025 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. 133/2024 registered at Police Station – Patewa, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 137(2), 87, 64, 64(2)(E) of B.N.S. 2023, Section 4,6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that father of victim lodged a missing report in the concerned police station stating that her daughter was missing from the house, based on which initially F.I.R. was registered for offence under Section 137 of B.N.S. During course of investigation, victim was recovered and after PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 recording her statement other offence were also added and applicant was arrested on 04.12.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. Victim and her father are now examined before the trial court and from their evidence it is appearing that applicant has not committed such offence as alleged. He submits that material witnesses have already been examined and there is no likelihood of influencing of material witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 04.12.2024, hence, application be allowed and the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that looking to the gravity of offence, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. He further submits that in the F.I.R. as also the statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, victim has specifically levelled allegation of committing sexual intercourse with her by applicant. 5. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim along with her father is present before this Court through virtual mode from DLSA, Mahasamund. They submitted that they are having objection in grant of bail to applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention, as also the fact that victim and her father have already examined before the trial court and considering documents filed along with bail application including deposition sheets, there is no likelihood of influencing material witnesses, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail 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 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