1 2025:CGHC:6265 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ORDER RESERVED ON 21.01.2025 ORDER DELIVERED ON 04.02.2025 MCRC No. 8825 of 2024 1 - Upendra Kumar Bunkar S/o Fulchandra Ram Aged About 38 Years Occupation - Proprietor Choice Centre (Wrongly Mentioned As Jwice Centre), R/o Subhash Nagar, Ambikapur, P.S. - Gandhinagar, Tahsil - Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh (Wrongly Mention P.S. Gandhinagar) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 9078 of 2024 1 - Savita Ghosh W/o Kishore Ghosh Aged About 47 Years Occupation - Service (Nurse), R/o Fundurdihari, P.S. - Gandhinagar, Tahsil - Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh --Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kotwali Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 2 For Applicant : Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate assisted by Shri Vishal Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State Ms.Laxmeen Kashyap, PL For Respondent/Objector : Ms. Seema Singh, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) C A V Order As both these M.Cr.C's arise out of the same crime number they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The applicants have filed these bail applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 742/2024 registered at police station Ambikapur, District Surguja, (CG) ) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(e), 55, 318(4), 338,3 36(3), 340(2) of the BNS Act, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act, 2012. 3. Prosecution case in brief is that complainant lodged a report alleging that her daughter was residing with her brother and sister-in-law and pursuing her studies in Class 10th at Sunrise School, Ghutrapara, Ambikapur. It is alleged that on 25.10.2024 she went to school in the morning at about 8.00 am and thereafter she was found missing. On being suspicion that some unknown person had allured her minor daughter, crime under Section 137(2) of the BNS was registered. Search was conducted and on 17.11.2024, the victim was recovered and her memorandum statement was recorded in which she has stated that accused Mitthu Ram allured her on the pretext of marriage and seduced to illicit intercourse on several occasions. It is the allegation against the applicant that he along with the applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 9078/2024 had manipulated the date of birth of the victim as 2.10.2000 in place of 2.10.2010 and had also prepared notary and 3 thus cooperated in preparing the duplicate date of birth certificate of the victim showing her to be major. 4. Contention of the counsel for the applicants on behalf of the applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 8825/2024 is concerned, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the applicant runs a Choice Centre and the victim came to his shop for correction in the date of birth in the Aadhar card and on the basis of valid document ie. birth certificate, he had updated her Aadhar card and given the receipt thereof. 5. So far as the applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 9078/2024 is concerned, the applicant was working as Female Health Worker the Health and Family Welfare Department and she issued the birth certificate of the victim which was manipulated by co-accused Upendra Kumar Bunkar by changing the date of birth of the victim to be 2.10.2000 in place of 2.10.2010 in the Aadhar Card and thus she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. It is further contended that the main accused is Mitthu Ram Ravi who had prepared the forged and fabricated birth certificate by putting forged signature. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 3.12.2024 and 7.12.2024 receptively, and looking to the conduct of the prosecution it is clear that the trial will take time for its conclusion and therefore the applicant be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that the applicants have committed a serious offence by manipulating a false and fabricated date of birth certificate mentioning the age of the victim to be 24 years by increasing 10 years and prepared the Aadhar card showing her to be major and therefore, they may not be released on bail. 4 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary with utmost circumspection. 8. On due consideration of the rival submissions and the fact that the applicants have assisted the applicant Mitthu Ram in manipulating the forged date of birth certificate and Aadhar Card whereby the victim was shown to be major aged 24 years who was actually 14 years of age and the applicants helped the co-accused Mithu Ram Ravi by taking away the minor victim from the lawful guardianship of her parents without permission on a false pretention of marriage and committed rape with the victim on several occasions. Thus, they were involved in the conspiracy of forgedly making the documents genuine of a minor girl which is a heinous crime, therefore I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, their bail applications filed under Section 483 of the BNSS are hereby rejected. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.02.04 15:22:48 +0530