1 2025:CGHC:61293 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10121 of 2025 Leela Ram Banjare S/o Late Punarad Banjare Aged About 27 Years R/o W. No. 02, Darripara, Fingeshwar, Police Station Fingeshhwar, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Fingeshwar District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mhd. Afroz Athar, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. G.L. Uike, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 16/12/2025 1. The victim along with her father appeared through virtual mode from concerned DLSA and recorded ‘objection’ in granting bail the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 2nd bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 88/2025, registered at Police Station – Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 69, 87 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. First bail of the application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.08.2025 passed in MCRC no.5384/2025. 4. As per prosecution case, the allegation against the applicant is that he took the victim along with him from her lawful guardianship and keep her with him for 15 days and also committed sexual intercourse with SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.12.16 17:09:34 +0530 2 her. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The age of the victim is not proved. The victim and her father have been examined before the Trial Court and they have not supported the case of prosecution. There was a love affair between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. He further submits that the victim herself joined the company of the applicant on her own free will. Her medical report also not supported the case of prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 23.04.2025, out of 22 prosecution witnesses only 3 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, the MLC report is also positive, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 7. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, detention period of the applicant and the fact that the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 10. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham