1 / 3 2025:CGHC:12149 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 678 of 2025 1 - Shailesh Painkara S/o Shri Kathalu Ram Painkara Aged About 31 Years R/o village Udari, Police Station-Lundra, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Lundra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Kumar Mishra, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 11/03/2025 1. This is the second 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 15/05/2023 in connection with Crime No.51/2023, registered at Police Station- Lundra, District Surguja, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376DB, 506 Part II of IPC and Section 5 (m) (g)/6 of the POCSO Act. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.03.17 17:06:51 +0530 2 / 3 2. Earlier the First Bail Application bearing MCRC No.8869 of 2023 was dismissed on merits on 31/01/2024. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant along with other co-accused persons have have forcefully abducted the victim aged about 12 years and have committed sexual assault with her. As per the allegation, both the accused persons have committed sexual assault with the victim. On the basis of the report lodged, the applicant was arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated because the medical report do not corroborate the case of the prosecution as there is no evidence of any injury on any part of the body of the victim. He would next contend that there are major contradictions and inconsistencies in the statements of the witnesses. He would lastly contend that the applicant is in jail since 15/05/2023 and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail applications submitted by the applicants. 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 considering the age of the victim as she was 11 years old on the date of incident and the applicant along with the other co-accused person 3 / 3 has forcefully abducted the minor girl and committed sexual assault. Further there is no substantial change in the circumstances of the case, therefore, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible, if there is no legal impediment. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu