1 2025:CGHC:59849 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9783 of 2025 Sachin Gupta S/o Manoj Gupta Aged About 21 Years R/o Chalgali, P.S.- Chalgali, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through P.S.- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. G.L. Uike, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 09.12.2025 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 15 of 2025 registered at Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G) for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.12.09 17:30:26 +0530 2 2. The first bail application has been dismissed by order dated 10.06.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.No. 4063 of 2025. 3. As per the prosecution case, the victim and accused came to be acquainted with each other at Tatapani fair in the year 2023 and thereafter they used to talk on mobile. On 02.01.2024, the applicant accused took the minor girl to Ambikapur on the pretext of marriage and kept her in a rented house for six months at Ambikapur and during this period, the applicant had committed sexual intercourse on several times. Thereafter, the accused dropped the victim to her house and again he took her away to some other places where he committed sexual intercourse. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was an inordinate delay in filing the report and there is no explanation for such delay in lodging the FIR on 01.02.2025 whereas the incident is said to have taken place on 02.01.2024. He further submits that prosecutrix had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and both they were residing together in a rented house for certain period and when the marriage was denied by the mother of applicant, the report was filed. He next submits that the medical report does not support the prosecution case regarding the age of prosecutrix. He further submits that after rejection of the earlier bail application, the victim her father and mother have been examined before the trial Court wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and they have turned hostile witnesses. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.02.2025 and looking to his period of custody, he may be released on bail. 3 5. Per contra, learned Counsel State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that on pretext of marriage, the applicant had continuously committed sexual intercourse with the minor girl and eventually refused to marry the victim saying that she belonged to a different caste. 6. The victim has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and has not objected to grant bail. 7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and further considering the court statements of the victim, her father and mother as also looking to the custody period of the applicant, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed in that behalf. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao