1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7638 of 2025 1 - Sumeet Swarnkar S/o Shri Gajanand Swarnkar, Aged About 28 Years Occupation- Student, R/o Chandranagar, Raigarh, Police Station Chakradharnagar, Tehsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Of Police Station Chakradharnagar, Tehsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Mayank Kumar, Advocate. For State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 25/09/2025 1. This is the third 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 in connection with Crime No. 268/2025 registered at Police Station Chakradharnagar, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 75(1)(i), 75(i)(iv), 78(1)(i) Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.09.25 18:26:34 +0530 2 of BNS, 2023 and Section 8 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, a written report was made by the mother of the victim alleging therein that on 14.06.2025, she along with her son and victim had gone to a shop, her son went inside the shop and at that time, seeing her daughter alone one boy started talking with her and as soon as she came out of the shop her daughter was missing. After some time, her daughter came back to the house and stated the incident that one unknown boy was talking to her outside the shop and took her beside a lane of the shop by holding her hand with bad intentions. Then she fled away from the spot. Again, on 15.06.2025 at about 5:30 pm, she again went to the shop where the boy came and asked her to be her girlfriend, then she fled away. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit on 29.07.2025 in MCRC No. 5646/2025 and the second bail of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn on 02.09.2025 in MCRC No. 6486/2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as the charge sheet was not 3 filed, but now, the charge sheet has been filed. At the time of the first bail application, despite service of notice, the victim/complainant/informant was not present to raise an objection. As per the order sheet of the trial Court, the charge was framed on 05.08.2025. Despite service of notice and a bailable warrant, the victim has not appeared before the trial court to give her evidence. Therefore, an arrest warrant has been issued against the victim. He orally submits that yesterday i.e. 24.09.2025, the case was fixed for the appearance of the victim, but the victim did not appear yesterday either. The applicant is in jail since 16.06.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, looking to the above facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 6. The service report of the notice to the victim is still awaited. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also looking to the order sheet of the trial Court it is clear that despite service of notice and bailable warrant, the 4 victim is not appearing before the trial Court for examination even the arrest warrant has been issued against the victim, the victim is not co-operating in the trial proceeding further, looking to the nature of offence and fact that the applicant is in custody since 16.06.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu