1 2025:CGHC:42720 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5181 of 2025 Raja Alias Rajkumar S/o Shri Ram Nivas Rajak, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Chichgohna, P.S. Marwahi, Tahsil Marwahi, District Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station-Marwahi, District Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi, C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.77/2025, registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1), 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 25/5/2025 a report was lodged before the concerned Police Station stating that on PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.08.23 12:23:41 +0530 2 24/5/2025 at about 6 PM, the victim was walking towards her house, where Amol Prajapati, Raja, Sajan and Prem Bhaina were standing and it has been further alleged that Raja asked her where she is going and Raja and along with other co-accused person forcefully caught hold of her and took her near a mango tree. All the 4 persons drank alcohol and thereafter, the accused persons committed rape. It has also been alleged that all 4 accused persons slept beneath the tree and raja dropped the victim to her friend's house, the husband of the victim found her in her friend’ s house and consequently when she informed her husband a report to that effect was lodged against the accused persons. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26.05.2025 and is suffering without any justifiable reasons, whereas the offences registered are not made out against the present applicant and till date the trial has not been concluded. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and also statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. However, it is observed that the name of the applicant does not appear in the initial statement of the victim recorded under Section 3 183 of BNSS. When questioned by the prosecution as to why the applicant’s name was not disclosed in her statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim stated that she was not feeling comfortable at the time of giving the statement, and therefore, she did not name him. Subsequently, in her later statement under Section 183 BNSS, the victim has specifically made allegations of gang rape against the applicant along with the co-accused persons. Furthermore, the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report has also been found to be positive. In view of the serious nature of the allegation of gang rape, the involvement of the applicant as named in the FIR. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 07.08.2025, the Superintendent of Police, Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, (C.G.) has filed his additional affidavit disclosing the evidence collected against the applicants during the course of investigation. The relevant portion of the affidavit reads as under:- (i) in compliance of the Hon'ble Court's order dated 07/08/2025, the deponent respectfully submits that upon inquiry in the matter from the victim about the discrepancies made in the FIR as well as in the statement Under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. again the statement of the prosecutrix /victim was recorded on 20/08/2025 in which she has stated that although she had disclosed the name of all the 4 accused persons in the written complaint as well as FIR, but when her statement recorded before U/s 183 of B.N.S.S. was Magistrate, because of the fear she could not disclosed the name of present appellant i.e. Raja @Rajkumar but 4 the actual fact is that the present applicant has committed the offence against her. That in compliance of the Hon'ble Court's order, copy of statement of the prosecutrix/ victim alongwith, Pandrive with respect to videography of the statement of prosecutrix/victim is collectively filed herewith & marked as ANNEXURE R/1. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that, in compliance with this Court’s order dated 07.08.2025, the Superintendent of Police, Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.), has filed an additional affidavit disclosing the evidence collected against the applicant, it is noted that, in response to a specific query raised by this Court, it has been clarified that the applicant is named in the FIR along with statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, however, it is observed that the name of the applicant does not appear in the initial statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, when questioned by the prosecution as to why the applicant’s name was not disclosed in her initial statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim stated that she was not feeling comfortable at the time of giving the statement, and therefore, she did not mention his name, subsequently, in her later statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim has specifically made allegations of gang rape against the applicant along with the co-accused persons, furthermore, the FSL 5 report has also been found to be positive, in view of the serious nature of the allegation of gang rape, the involvement of the applicant as named in the FIR, the victim’s categorical statement implicating the applicant, and the supporting FSL report, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Raja Alias Rajkumar involved in Crime No.77/2025, registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1), 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected at this stage. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti