1 2025:CGHC:14342 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 790 of 2025 1 - Tulsi Sahu S/o Shri Bahur Ram Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward No. 05, Khallaripara At Bemcha, P.S. And Tahsil And Distt. Mahasamund, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S.- Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri J.A.Lohani, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri G.L.Uikey, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/03/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 258/2024 registered at police station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(3), 506 Part-II of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 2 3. Prosecution case in brief is that on 17.05.2024, the prosecutrix aged aboaut 15 years complained her parents that she was suffering from stomach ache and on being asked by the parents,she informed that on 30-31.03.2024, at about 11-12.00 hrs. when she was going to school, on the way, the preent applicant propsed her and thereafter on the pretext of marriage, had committed sexual intercourse. She was admitted at Aditya Hospital, Mahasamund where she was found pregnant and a complaint was registered at police station Mahasamund on 19.05.2024 as Crime No. 258/2024. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the offence against the applicant and was arrested. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He further contended that the FIR was lodged with a delay of about 5 months. It is contended that the version of the prosecutrix is not trustworthy because she had narrated different stories and registered cases against three others for the same offence of sexual assault and therefore the testimony of the prosecutrix is not credible and creates doubt as she has narrated different stories in her statements. It is submitted that similary placed accused Rajendra Sahu in Crime No. 257/2024 has been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 6869/2024 vide order dated 08.01.2025, therefore the present applicant may also be granted similar benefit. It is further contended that the charge sheet has been filed, he is in jail since 20.05.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 3 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. From perusal of the prosecution case, it appears that the prosecutrix had falsely implicated the applicant in the said crime. However, after the victim gave birth to a child and DNA test was done and as per the report, applicant was not the biological father of the child. 9. In the present case, though the applicant had denied to have made any physical relation with the prosecutrix but considering the fact that it was not the first occasion when the complaint was made by the prosecutrix against the applicant for committing rape but in the same vein she made similar type of allegations against other persons also Thus, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is in jail since 20.05.2024, charge sheet has been filed and that the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. It is directed that in the event of applicant’s executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions: I) he shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the Court. IN case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. ii) he shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his absence without sufficient 4 cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 is issued and the applicants failed to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her. In accordance with law under Section 209 of BNS, 2023. iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (I) opening of the case (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS, 2023.If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.27 11:10:56 +0530