1 2025:CGHC:51076 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7618 of 2025 Dev Kumar Pando, S/o Kumaru Pando, aged about 20 years, R/o Pnadari Pashchimpara Police Station Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Raghunathnagar District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Prachi Diwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Ruhul Ameen, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/10/2025 1. Vide order dated 06.10.2025, victim along with her father appeared virtually from the concerned DLSA. The victim has recorded ‘no objection’ while her father recorded ‘objection’ in granting bail to the Applicant. 2. In compliance of order dated 06.10.2025 itself, the Station House Officer namely Devendra Thakur of Police Station Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) appeared before this Court today. His presence be marked. SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.10.14 17:00:22 +0530 2 3. 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. 28/2025, registered at Police Station – Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 65(1) & 69 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 4. First bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order of this Court dated 28.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.5081/2025. 5. The prosecution's case, in short, is that the applicant knowing fully well that the victim was a minor, committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he has been arrested on 22.03.2025. 6. 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 been turned hostile. She further submits that at the time of incident, the victim was major aged about 19 years. Her father had filed the report against the applicant in the greed of compensation. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2025, out of 14 prosecution witnesses, only 3 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 7. 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, therefore, 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, detention period of the applicant and looking to the Court statements of victim and her father and further considering the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 3 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 Shubham