1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7446 of 2025 Samir Khan @ Hardik Khan S/o Shri Sonu Khan Aged About 20 Years R/o Village-Bootapara, Police Station Torwa, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant. versus State of Chhattisgarh through- Police Station- Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For the respondent : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 25.09.2025 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No 175/2025 registered at Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence under Section 64(2)(m), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. The first bail application has been dismissed on 06.08.2025 in M.Cr.C.no.5672/2025 on the ground that the trial has not commenced. 3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the applicant is that on 07.04.2025, the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with the minor victim on the pretext of marriage. The further allegation is that he has threatened the victim girl to life. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim has been examined before the Court and the statement made in her cross 2 examination at para 9 entirely contradicts her statement in examination-in- chief and because of such inconsistent statements, her evidence cannot given credence. He further submits that although the prosecutrix is stated to be minor, yet the evidence of correct age has not been collected by the prosecution. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 10.04.2025 and till date out of 13 witnesses, only the victim and her mother have been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of the case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident. He submits that the case diary report shows 3 criminal antecedents against the applicant. 6. Service report shows that the notice sent to the victim has been returned unserved. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the court statement of prosecutrix at para 9 of her cross examination and also considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 10.04.2025, there is no immediate possibility of disposal of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the present applicant at this stage. 9. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is also directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till completion of the trial. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao