1 2025:CGHC:797 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8913 of 2024 Aman Kumar Singh S/o Bramhdev Singh Aged About 19 Years R/o Chak Mohammad Ward No.1, Police Station District- District- Vaishali, Bihar. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent (Cause title is taken from the CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 06/01/2025 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, counsel for the applicant and Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. for the State-Respondent. 2. In compliance of Court’s order dated 20.12.2024, today victim is appeared along with her mother before this Court through video 2 conferencing from the DLSA- Balod (C.G.). On being asked, she has no objection to release the applicant on bail. 3. The applicant has been preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.497/2024, registered at Police Station- Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) of the BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 4. Brief facts of this case are that, on 09.10.2024, the accused/applicant kidnapped the prosecutrix aged 17 years and 09 months from the guardianship of her parents without their consent and compelled her to have sexual intercourse with her. On the basis of complaint, FIR was lodged against the applicant for the offence under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) of the BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that, the present applicant is innocent he has not committed any offence, he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further contended that the applicant is pursuing his studies and he has a whole future ahead of him and if put in jail his future will be at risk. He further contended that the applicant is innocent because the applicant and the prosecutrix married in the temple with their 3 mutual consent in the presence of the priest and the family of the applicant. He further contended that the applicant has not kidnapped the prosecutrix and she has gone to the home of the applicant willingly and the prosecutrix gave her statement in local police station that she wants to continue living with the applicant and wants to settle down with the present applicant. The applicant was arrested from his own house where both the applicant and prosecutrix were living peacefully with each other and after which the family of the prosecutrix put falls allegations against him before which they were living happily and consensually together. The applicant is in jail since 12.11.2024 and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be released on bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties, perused the case diary and other materials available on record. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering that it is a case of elopement and the applicant is in jail since 12.11.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 9. Let the applicant- Aman Kumar Singh involved in Crime No.497/2024, registered at Police Station- Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) of the BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions : (i) 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 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 BNS, 2023. 5 (iv) 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, 2023. 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. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, if there is no legal impediment. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR