1 2025:CGHC:506 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8215 of 2024 • Bajrang Kashyap S/o Hriday Kashyap Aged About 22 Years R/o Rajkamma, Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Mishra, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board 03.01.2025 1. In pursuance of direction given by this Court on 28.11.2024, the victim along with her parents is present before this Court and has raised objection in releasing the applicant on bail. 2. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested on 29.03.2024 in connection with Crime No. 201/2024 registered at Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (2)(n), 313 of Indian Penal Code, Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim lodged a written complaint at Police Station Katghora alleging that on 02.03.2020 victim had gone for a walk near Chitamada Paththar where accused came BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2025.02.06 12:06:35 +0530 2 and made forceful physical relationship with her and when she refused he did not agree and on the pretext of marriage continuously he made physical relationship with her for the last 04 years. It is further alleged that meanwhile the applicant took victim to Dhamtari and kept her in a rented house for 03 months wherein she became pregnant and the applicant gave tablets for abortion. On the basis of the complaint, FIR was registered and offence as mentioned above has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim has already been examined before learned trial Court which clearly shows that the victim is a major girl and there was consensual relationship between applicant and victim. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant has committed rape upon her. He would further submit that victim’s father and mother have been examined before learned trial Court wherein they have stated that the date of birth of the victim has been recorded by victim’s Grandfather(nana) without any documents regarding date of birth, therefore, date of birth is hypothetical and cannot be relied upon. He would further submit that on the date of lodging of the complaint victim was aged about 19 years and she has denied all the allegations leveled against the applicant and in her cross-examination she has denied that the applicant has forcefully made physical relationship with her on 02.03.2020 at Chitamada Paththar, thus he would submit that no material has been placed on record against the applicant. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 29.03.2024, the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the 3 submission would submit that the victim’s date of birth is still to be proved, as such, submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that date of birth is being written on the basis of presumption and assumption is premature at this juncture. He would further submit that the victim in her statement recorded before the Court has categorically stated that the applicant has kept victim at Chaitma like husband and wife and made physical relationship with her wherein she became pregnant, thereafter, abortion was also done. Thus, there is sufficient material against the applicant and would pray for rejection of the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim’s age is below 19 years cannot be considered at this juncture as neither the statement of the Head Master from where she has imparted education has been placed on record nor any medical record regarding abortion or pregnancy of the victim has been placed on record, since the evidence is at a premature stage, therefore, at this juncture bail petition cannot be considered. I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the bail application filed by the applicant should be considered. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is disposed of granting liberty to the applicant to revive bail petition after material witnesses with regard to date of birth are examined before learned trial Court. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika