1 2025:CGHC:3786 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8938 of 2024 1 - Jagjeevan Nag S/o Ramjlal Nath Aged About 18 Years R/o Jariyo Dumugnapara, Police Station Chando, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer Police Station Chando, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ---Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shikhar Agnihotri Advocates. For-Non-applicant : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Vema, Judge Order on Board 21/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 42/2024 registered at Police Station Chando, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 65(1) 87, 137, 142 of BNS Act and Section 4 & 6 of POCSO Act. 2. In pursuance of notice issued to victim, today, victim along with her mother appeared before this Court through DSLA Balrampur and raised objection in releasing the applicant on bail. 3. The allegation against the present applicant as per the prosecution case is that, the present applicant knowing the fact that the prosecutrix was a minor, he is said to have taken the prosecutrix to his house and and there he is said to have on the pretext of marriage had a physical 2 relationship with her and he is already a married man. Subsequently, an F.I.R. in this regard was lodged and the present applicant has been arrested on 12.09.2024. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that it is a case of elopement and not of taking away, enticing or abduction. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and she had established sexual relationship with the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 12.09.2024, therefore he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the State however opposing the bail application submits that the present applicant is already a married person. Further the consent of the prosecutrix is immaterial for the reason that the prosecutrix was a minor and thus prayed for rejection of bail application. 6. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of records, particularly considering the fact that the applicant is already a married man and further the fact that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident and the consent of the prosecutrix was immaterial, this Court is of the view that present is not a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected, at this stage. 7. The OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.01.22 14:57:35 +0530