1 2025:CGHC:54406 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8903 of 2025 Aman Prajapati S/o Mukesh Prajapati Aged About 24 Years R/o Tarvan Mohalla Mahu, Indore District Indore, Current Residence Bhagiva P S Baadganv District Indore (M P) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mohan Nagar, Dist. Durg C.G. ---- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL For Objector : Mr. Rahul Ambast, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07/11/2025 1. The applicant has been preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail. The applicant is arrested in connection with Crime No.612/2023, registered at Police Station- Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.11.10 10:58:45 +0530 2 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. Brief facts of this case are that on 25.09.2023 an oral report was filed at PS Kurud Dhamtari by the Complainant that when his sister was 16 years 03 months 02 days has not returned home since she was out to market on 24.09.2023 at 11:00 AM. It is submitted that the aforesaid report was lodged by the brother of the Complainant knowing that the Applicant is having love affair with the prosecutrix. It is submitted that Complainant is pursuing the case however, the prosecutrix (even as per the story of the prosecution 18 years 4 months now) was living with the Applicant and had also given birth to a child. The applicant is a permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title with no criminal antecedents and has entire movable and immovable property is situated there itself, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding in case of his release on bail. Applicant shall also not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and further shall cooperate with prosecution. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that, the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the alleged crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. He further contended that Applicant has solemnized marriage with the prosecutrix, living together and they have a child. The complainant of this case has also filed an affidavit in support of the bail application of the applicant. It is submitted that keeping applicant behind custody is affecting 3 prosecutrix and her child adversely. He further contended that the aforesaid FIR was registered on 25.09.2023 however, the Applicant was arrested on 19.09.2025 and in between the Applicant has married the prosecutrix and were living together. The applicant is in jail since 19.09.2025 and and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the Objector contended that the complainant has no objection to release the applicant on bail because the applicant has solemnized marriage with the prosecutrix, living together and they have a child. 6. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties, perused the case diary and other materials available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that the prosecutrix is a major lady as per Aadhar Card, she is aged about 21 years and 04 months. Further considering that the applicant has solemnized marriage with the prosecutrix, living together and they have a child and the applicant is in jail since 19.09.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 8. Let the applicant involved in Crime No.612/2023, registered at Police Station- Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like sum 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS, 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 the 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 5 initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS, 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 him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant