1 / 3 2025:CGHC:55677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8625 of 2025 1 - Vicky Alias Samar Vishwas S/o Badal Vishwas Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram/post Sakalo, Near Kali Mandir, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District Sarguja (C.G.) 2 - Proveer Didhar S/o Joytish Didhar Aged About 27 Years R/o Bengali Para Sakalo, Ambikapur, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer, Tikrapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr Shikhar Agnihotri, Advocate For State /Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 14/11/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested on 12/07/2025 & 14/07/2025, respectively, in connection with Crime No. 516/2025, registered at Police Station Tikrapara, Distt. Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.17 18:44:59 +0530 2 / 3 363, 366, 376 (2) (n), 332, 506, 307, 201, 34 of IPC and Sections 6, 17, 19 of POCSO Act. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that mother of the prosecutrix lodged a report on 10/07/2025 alleging that the accused Kishor Gayne on 22/04/2024 abducted her minor daughter and took her to village Sakalu and performed marriage with her minor daughter i.e. the prosecutrix and when she came to know about the said fact she went to the house of Kishor Gayne along with her husband, however, Kishor restrained her from meeting her daughter and also extended threat to commit suicide if she will take her daughter. Thereafter, on 05/05/2024 the complainant came to know that the prosecutrix has received injury by way of an air gun, she went to the hospital where the prosecutrix told her that she was abducted and subjected to forceful rape and was also threatened of dire consequences. Thereafter, the report was lodged. The allegation on the present applicants is that they helped in the aforesaid crime of abduction of the prosecutrix. On the basis of the report the investigation was carried out and the applicants were arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the prosecutrix was in love relation with other co-accused and she performed marriage and was residing with him. He would next contend that for the aforesaid act no report was lodged by the parents of the prosecutrix it is only when accidentally the prosecutrix received some injury from the air gun then only the report has been lodged. He would next contend that the prosecutrix has admitted that she is having an affair with the co-accused. He would lastly contend that the present applicants have not played any 3 / 3 role and have not committed any offence and would submit that the applicants are in jail since 12/07/2025 & 14/07/2025, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. The prosecutrix along with her mother appeared through VC from DLSA, Raipur and she raised objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicants. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the nature & gravity of offence i.e. abduction, rape and causing injury to the prosecutrix by way of an air gun, wherein the present applicants have participated, therefore, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu