1 2025:CGHC:5295 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8156 of 2024 • Umesh Gendle S/o Rajesh Gendle Aged About 21 Years R/o Ward No. 04, Village Podi, Police Station Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant : Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, PL. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 29.01.2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.587/2024, registered at PS –Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, for commission of offence punishable under Sections 127(2), 64 of the BNS and Section 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that present applicant looked the minor victim in the room and, thereafter, committed forceful sexual intercourse with her. Based upon report, FIR was registered and applicant has been arrested in the aforementioned crime. 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. There is delay in lodging of FIR, which has not been explained properly by the prosecution. Medical report of victim has not supported the case of prosecution. There is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the applicants, they are in jail since 23.09.2024, charge sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, they may be released on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that there is specific allegation against the applicant of committing the aforesaid offence/crime with minor victim aged about 14 years, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. None appeared on behalf of the victim, though notice has been duly served. 7. Considering facts of the case, nature of allegations, submission of counsel for the parties, further the fact that present applicant took the minor victim in the room and, thereafter, committed forceful sexual intercourse with her, further considering the statement of victim wherein she has made specific allegation against the applicant, I am not inclined to allow this bail application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is hereby rejected. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-