1 2025:CGHC:56126 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8866 of 2025 1 - Dilip Alias Deep More S/o Late Hiraram More Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Aawri, Charama, Thana Charama, Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Charama, Distt- U.B. Kanker C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri K.K.Bahrani, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 18/11/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 63/2025 registered at police station Charama, District Uttar Bastar-Kanker(CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64 and 64(2)(e) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.11.19 15:08:39 +0530 2 2. The case as described alleges that on 07.05.2025, a missing report was filed by the complainant, father of the victim, that his minor daughter is missing since 06.05.2025. It is alleged that the applicant had allured the prosecutrix with him. It is also alleged that since the year 2023, he was sexually harassing her and continuously subjected to rape after threatening her or dire consequences, if she disclosed to anyone. Based on the said complaint, the police registered the crime and initiated investigation. However, on 10.05.2025, she returned home and on the next day ie. 11.05.2025, recovery panchnama was prepared, statement of the prosecutrix was recorded and the applicant was arrested. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the applicant was arrested on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that there was a delay of about two years in lodging the FIR and no explanation has been offered for the said delay. He further submits that the prosecuktrix was examined before the trial court and she has not supported the prosecution case and has turned hostile. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 12.05.2025, the charge sheet has been filed 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. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application. 3 5. Victim and her mother appeared through the concerned DLSA and have raised no objection. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. On due consideration of the rival submissions and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 12.05.2025, the charge sheet has been filed and looking to the fact that the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case and the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, his bail application is allowed. 8. It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions: i) He shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. ii) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. iii) the applicant is directed not to communicate/contact in any manner with the prosecutrix, her family members and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet any other person concerned or attempt to ask for any favour in the trial directly or indirectly. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge