1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8019 of 2025 1 - Ratan Shikari S/o Late Gahdul Shikari Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Patrapara Tahsil- Lailunga District- Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Sajan Shikari S/o Ratan Shikari Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Patrapara Tahsil- Lailunga District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In Charge Police Station- Lailunga, Distt.- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, 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 them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 117/2025 registered at Police Station – Lailunga, District – Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 70(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of POCSO Act. HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.10.16 14:32:21 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution’s case, the applicants went to the house of the minor victim and forced her to marry the co- accused (juvenile in conflict with law). It is alleged that the applicants lured her, gave her alcohol and kidnapped her from the lawful guardianship of her parents and the co- accused (juvenile) committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. On report being lodged in this regard, the applicants were arrested on 08.05.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that there are 16 listed witnesses in this case, out of which 2 witnesses i.e. the victim and her father have been examined who have turned hostile and do not support the case of the prosecution. The applicants are in jail since 08.05.2025, and there is no likelihood of their case being decided in the near future; therefore, the present applicants may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants forced the prosecutrix to have physical relation with the co- accused (juvenile); therefore, at this stage, they may not be enlarged on bail. 5. The victim along with her father, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and recorded no objection to grant bail to the applicants. 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 applicants are in custody since 08.05.2025, only 2 witnesses have been examined out of 16 listed witnesses, who have not supported the case of the prosecution and the fact that the victim and her father have no objection to grant bail to the applicants, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicants are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to them 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