1 / 4 2025:CGHC:55407 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8098 of 2025 Jaydev Badhai S/o Shri Dilip Badhai Aged About 27 Years R/o P.V.- 115, Satyanandnagar, Thana- Pakhanjur, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Pakhanjur, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For State /Respondent : Mr. Vikram Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 13/11/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 17/02/2025 in connection with Crime No.10/2025, registered at police station Pakhanjur, District North Bastar, Kanker, C.G. under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 (2)(m), 65 (1) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.14 15:05:55 +0530 2 / 4 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 17/01/2025 the mother of the victim lodged a missing report at Police Station Pakhanjur, stating that at about 02.00 AM, her minor daughter had left the house without informing her mother or father. On a suspicion of kidnapping of her daughter a missing report was lodged and on the basis of the same the police registered an FIR and during the investigation the prosecutrix was recovered and her statement was recorded. Thereafter, the present applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim and the applicant were in love relation and they used to talk over mobile phone since more than 1.5 years and the mother of the victim used to stop her from doing so. He would next contend that the victim herself joined the company of the applicant and she travelled various places along with the applicant. He would next contend that the medical report do not corroborate the fact of forceful sexual intercourse as no external or internal injuries have been found on the body of the prosecutrix. He would next contend that the statement of the prosecution witnesses i.e. the Prosecutrix, mother of the prosecutrix and father of the prosecutrix and there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. He would lastly contend that the radiological test suggest the age of the victim between 15-18 years, therefore, she was a major and the applicant is in jail since 17/02/2025, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 3 / 4 5. The prosecutrix along with her father appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA before this Court and she raised objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case more particularly the fact that the radiological report suggests the age of the victim between 15 to 18 and further the record shows that they were in love relation with each other and the statement of the prosecutrix given under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the charge-sheet in this case has been filed as well as the detention period of the applicant as the applicant is in jail since 17/02/2025, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant Jaydev Badhai, involved in Crime No.10/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 (2)(m), 65 (1) of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, police station Pakhanjur, District North Bastar, Kanker, C.G., be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in 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 4 / 4 case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 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 Nyay Sanhita, 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 sufficient 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. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/SSD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu