1 2025:CGHC:42701 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6279 of 2025 Amit Das S/o Gajadhar Mahant Aged About 19 Years R/o Kunjedabri, Police Station Jutmil, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Jutmil, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 22/08/2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared virtually before this Court today and recorded ‘no objection’ in granting bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st 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. 129/2025, registered at Police Station – Jutmil, Raigarh District- Raigarh (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2), (H)(M), 87 & 142 of BNS and U/s 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that a missing complaint was lodged by father of the victim at concerned Police Station to the 2 effect that someone has lured his minor daughter and take her away with him, on the basis of the said complaint of the victim's father, crime has been registered against an unknown person. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the victim was a consenting party and she joined the company of the applicant on her own free will. Both of them have performed marriage and the victim is also carrying the child of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 4.07.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. 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 and she became pregnant by the applicant, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of offence. At this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham