1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7978 of 2025 1 - Balchand S/o Munnalal Aged About 21 Years Caste - Dhobi, R/o Village - Pakni, Police Station - Chandora, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Chandora, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushawaha, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sachchidanand Yadav, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 16 / 10 / 2025 1. The accused/applicant has moved this second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 21/2025 registered at Police Station – Chandora, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 4/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 18.03.2025, the complainant, mother of the victim, lodged a report to the HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.10.16 14:32:21 +0530 2 concerned police station alleging therein that the appellant, Balchand Rajak of their village, allured her minor girl and, on the pretext of marriage, committed physical abuse with her from 07.07.2022. It is also alleged that the applicant committed the same offence with her minor girl on 13.02.2025 too. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that there are 19 listed witnesses in this case, out of which 4 witnesses i.e. the victim, her aunts (Mausi and Bua) and uncle (Mosa) have been examined who have turned hostile and do not support the case of the prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 18.03.2025, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future; therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident and the applicant committed a heinous offence with the minor girl; therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. The victim along with her aunt (Bua), present in person before this Court and recorded no objection to grant bail to the applicant. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the applicant is in custody since 18.03.2025, only 4 witnesses have been examined out of 19 listed witnesses and further, looking to the statements of the examined witnesses and the fact that the victim has no objection to grant bail to the applicant, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 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 H.L. Sahu