1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7485 of 2025 1 - Devendra Verma S/o Ramkhilawan Verma Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Sinodha, P.S. Hathband, Dist. - Balodabazaar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (Details As Per Charge Sheet). ... Applicant Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Bhatapara (Gramin), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Shri Ujjawal Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 15.10.2025 1. Pursuant to the order dated 17.09.2025, the mother of victim-A and Aunt of Victim-B, who is the same person, appeared in person before the court and raised objection in granting bail to the applicant. The submission is recorded. 2. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 04.06.2025 in connection with Crime No.362/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara (Gramin) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 65(2), 76 & 79 of BNS and Section 6 & 10 of POCSO Act. 3. As per prosecution case, on 03.06.2025 a report was lodged by the mother of victim-A that her minor daughter aged about 9 years is sexually exploited by the applicant on 22.05.2025. The applicant is her 2 cousin brother. It is also alleged that the applicant has also sexually exploited her niece who is another victim-B, aged about 7 years. On the report made by the complainant, the FIR has been registered against the applicant. He was arrested on 04.06.2025 and after investigation charge sheet was filed. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that there is improbable story developed by the complainant. The applicant being relative of the victim cannot even think about such offence. FIR has been lodged belated without explaining delay. To settle her own ego, she made her minor daughter and niece instrumental and lodged report against applicant. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime. 5. On the other hand the counsel for the State as well as objector opposes the bail application and have submitted that in view of the statement of two victims and also her mother, the alleged offence prima facie appears to have been committed by the applicant and looking to the gravity and heinousness of the offence that too allegation of sexual exploitation by relative of victims, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 6. Without commenting on merits, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation and evidence collected during investigation further considering the statement of victim as well as her mother and also the heinousness of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that present is not a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder