1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8241 of 2025 1 - Amit Das S/o Gajadhar Mahant Aged About 19 Years R/o Kunjedabri, Police Station Jutmil, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Jutmil, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. For State : Mr. Sachchidanand Yadav, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 28/10/2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station Jutmil, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(H)(M), 87 & HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.10.28 17:14:18 +0530 2 142 of BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, a missing complaint was lodged by the father of the victim at concerned police station to the effect that on 13.04.2025 someone has lured his minor daughter and take her away with him, on the basis of the said complaint crime has been registered against unknown person. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from the possession of the present applicant. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit on 22.08.2025 in MCRC No. 6279/2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits after rejection of the first bail application, the victim, mother and father of the victim have been examined who turned hostile and do not support the case of the prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 05.07.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl, and the 3 pregnancy test of the victim was found to be positive; therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 6. The victim along with her father, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and recorded their no objection to grant bail to the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that after dismissal of the first bail application, out of 21 listed witnesses, 5 witnesses including the victim, mother and father of the victim have been examined before the trial Court, the applicant is in custody since 05.07.2025, the victim and her father made no objection to grant bail to the applicant and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any 4 observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu