1 / 4 2025:CGHC:61900 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9797 of 2025 Komal Kishore Karsh S/o Mayaram Karsh, Aged About 18 Years 05 Months, R/o Village Khajari, Police Station Bilaigarh, At Present R/o Village Pandrawan, Police Station Sarsinva, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) (Description of The Applicant Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Sarsinva, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For State /Respondent : Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 19/12/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 31/05/2025 in connection with Crime No. 135/2024, registered at Police Station Sarsinva, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.12.21 14:39:50 +0530 2 / 4 of Indian Penal Code; Section 64 (2-M) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita; Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act; and Section 3(2)(V)(A) of the ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the father of the prosecutrix made a complaint on 13/03/2024 stating that his daughter left home without informing anyone at about 3.00 AM in the morning. Thereafter, on the basis of the above report an investigation was carried out and the prosecutrix was recovered on 28/05/2025 from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the present applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is love affair between the applicant and the prosecutrix and she herself has joined the company of the applicant. He would next contend that the recovery of the prosecutrix was made after one year and two months and she never raised any alarm. He would next contend that the prosecutrix has been examined and she has not supported the case of the prosecution in her statement given under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He would lastly contend that the age of the applicant was also 17 years at the time of incident and he is in custody since 31/05/2025 and the charge-sheet in this case has been filed and it will take some more time in concluding the trial, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. The prosecutrix appeared through Video Conferencing from DLSA Sarangarh and she raised objection for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 3 / 4 7. Perusal of the documents would show that prosecutrix in her statement given under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not deposed anything against the applicant and also looking to the fact that the prosecutrix herself joined the company of the applicant, therefore, it is a case of elopement. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and also looking to the age of the applicant as he was 17 years old at the time of incident and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet in this case has been filed and the material witnesses have been examined, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant Komal Kishore Karesh, involved in Crime No.135/2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376 of Indian Penal Code; Section 64 (2-M) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita; Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act; and Section 3(2)(V)(A) of the ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, police station Sarsinva, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G., be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in 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) the applicant shall remain present before the trial Court on 4 / 4 each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS, 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (iv) The applicant 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 applicant is 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu