1 2025:CGHC:4308 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8887 of 2024 1 - Mahesh S/o Suklaal Aged About 26 Years R/o Semra Meghraj, Police Station- Murwas, District : Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Chando, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Pranjal Shukla, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 23/01/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 19/2024 registered at police station Chando, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 363,366,376(2)(n) and 376 IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 01.01.2024, the prosecutrix came in contact with the applicant who is a resident of Indore (MP) through mobile 2 and they became friends. Thereafter the applicant allured her that he will marry her and called her to his village Semra, District Vidisha. It is alleged that on 23.04.2024, the victim went to Indore by train and from there by bus to the village of the applicant where they married and were residing together. On 18.05.2024, she was recovered from the custody of the applicant and he was arrested. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the prosecutrix was having love affair and a consenting party. He submits that she went to the village of the applicant of her own and had got married with him. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 20.05.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that the prosecutrix was 17 years and 2 months at the time of incident. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. On due consideration of the rival submissions and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 20.05.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and looking to the fact that they got married and also that the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, his bail application is allowed. 9. It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions: 3 i) He shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. ii) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Iii) the applicant is directed not to communicate/contact in any manner with the prosecutrix, her family members and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet any other person concerned or attempt to ask for any favour in the trial directly or indirectly. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.01.23 06:53:51 -0500