1 2025:CGHC:3787 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8980 of 2024 1 - Rameshwar Painkra @ Chiku S/o Ramnarayan Painkra Aged About 24 Years R/o - Dahimar, Police Station- Udaypur,, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Udaypur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh --- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vishal Sahu, Advocate. For-Non-applicant : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, 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 Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No. 72/2024 registered at Police Station Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(E) of B.N.S. and Section 5(L) & 6 of POCSO Act. 2. 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 away the prosecutrix when she went to jungle side to graze cow and he is said to have had a physical relationship with her. Subsequently, an F.I.R. in this regard was lodged 2 and the present applicant has been arrested on 30.07.2024. 3. In pursuance of notice issued to victim, today, victim along with her father appeared before this Court through DSLA Surguja and raised objection in releasing the applicant on bail. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that there was an affair between the present applicant and prosecutrix and she was a consenting party and she had established sexual relationship with the applicant on her own will, the applicant is in jail since 30.07.2024, hence he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State however opposing the bail application submits that, 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. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of record, particularly taking note of the statement of the prosecutrix which shows that she established consensus relationship with the applicant and there was love affair between them and she turned hostile and also considering the fact that no injury was found on her person, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion and the applicant is in jail since 30.07.2024, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let applicant, Rameshwar Painkra @ Chiku, involved in Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No. 72/2024, under Section 64(2)(E) of B.N.S. Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.01.22 14:57:31 +0530 3 and Section 5(L) & 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station – Udaypur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in the like amount 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 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 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 Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023 (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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information 10. Accordingly, MCRC is allowed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Jyoti