1 2025:CGHC:49890 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7609 of 2025 • Satyaprakash @ Satish Bharadwaj S/o Andhiyar Das Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Samdeel, Police Station- Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Police Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate For State : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Dy. Government Advocate For Objector : Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advcoate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 07.10.2025 1. The victim along with her mother appeared before this Court today through video conferencing and recorded ‘objection’ in grating bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 2nd 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. 62/2025, registered at Police Station - Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for 2 offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 & 67 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. First bail application filed by the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4958 of 2025 considered the fact that out of 21 witnesses only 02 have been examined. 4. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 03.02.2025, the applicant took the victim without the consent of her lawful guardianship and committed sexual intercourse with her. On report being lodged in this regard, offence under the aforesaid Sections have been registered against the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. There was a love affair between the applicant and the victim, she was a consenting party and was major at the time of incident. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 25.03.2025, out of 21 prosecution witnesses, 09 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. 6. 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 aged about 17 years, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 7. Learned counsel for the objector opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, therefore, 3 looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, statements of victim and deposition of other 09 prosecution witnesses out of 21 witnesses and also considering that the applicant is in jail since 25.03.2025, more than 6 months he is in jail and 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. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 11. 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 Manish