1 2025:CGHC:40288 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6147 of 2025 1 - Rajyapal Adile S/o Sukhlal Adile, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Gram Johradabri, Police Station Hardibajar, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Hardibajar. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 11/08/2025 1. This is the first 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. 124/2025 registered at Police Station -Hardibajar, District Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3) of BNS and Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that, the complainant resides with her mother and younger sister. It is alleged that the SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.08.12 10:17:00 +0530 2 applicant, being a habitual drinker, has abandoned his wife due to his bad habits. On 10.06.2025, while the complainant was at home, the applicant visited her residence, called her aside, and allegedly made indecent proposals, stating that he would marry her and settle with her. When the complainant refused, the applicant purportedly abused her and threatened her with dire consequences. On report being made in this regard, an FIR was lodged against the applicant under Sections 351(3) and 296 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case due to a pre-existing grudge between the parties. A complaint filed by the applicant's father against the complainant and her family members, prior to the FIR, relates to a dispute over a public hand-pump. The delay of 40 days in lodging the FIR, from 10.06.2025, to 20.07.2025, further casts doubt on the prosecution's case. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in jail since 20.07.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application, submitting that at the time of the incident, the victim was a minor, aged about 15 years, and had supported the prosecution's case in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC. Given the nature and gravity of the 3 offense, the applicant should not be granted bail. 5. Today, victim along with her mother appeared virtually from the concerned DLSA and raised her objection in granting bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offense, the inordinate delay of 40 days in lodging the FIR, the pre-existing enmity between the parties, and the applicant's continued incarceration since 20.07.2025, without the charge-sheet being filed till date, I deem it appropriate to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 8. 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. 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 observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. 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