1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10190 of 2025 Kailash Kumar (Mehar) Sonwani S/o Kriparam (Mehar) Sonwani Aged About 20 Years R/o Village - Koliha (Kaushalpur), Police Station - Bhatapara (Gramin), District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Hathband, Arakshi Kendra Hathband, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Hrishabh Deo, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 12/01/2026 1. Despite service of notice to the victim, none appeared on behalf of the victim. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 31/2025, registered at Police Station – Hathband, District- Balodabaza-Bhatapara (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(d) & 65(1) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 26.02.2025, the complainant, who is father of the victim, lodged a missing report of the victim. On receiving the information, missing person report was registered. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from the SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.01.12 18:12:16 +0530 2 possession of the accused/applicant on 01.05.2025. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The victim has examined before the Trial Court and she has turned hostile. There was a love affair between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. There is no conclusive evidence available on record regarding her age. The applicant is in jail since 01.05.2025, out of 27 prosecution witnesses only 6 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, the DNA report is also positive, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, detention period of the applicant and the fact that the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 9. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham