1 2025:CGHC:56137 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8394 of 2025 1 - Babulal Baghel S/o Gopal Baghel, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sukhapali, Tehsil And P.S. Dabhara, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Duleshwari W/o Babulal Baghel, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Sukhapali, Tehsil And P.S. Dabhara, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Dabhara, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 18/11/2025 1. The applicant has been preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail. The applicant is arrested in connection with Crime No.229/2025, registered at Police Station- Dabhara, District Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 2 Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 65(1) read with Section 49 & 54 of BNS and Section 6 read with Section 17 of POCSO Act. 2. Brief facts of this case are that the prosecutrix made a written complaint against the present applicant along with other co-accused person with allegation that the prosecutrix was studying at Govt High School, Sukhapali, where she came to know about the present applicant, then the prosecutrix and the present applicant started exchanging messages with each other and on 28.05.2023, the present applicant took the prosecutrix with him to his house by giving her promise to marry and thereafter, both resided there for around one year and six months where the present applicant made physical relations with the prosecutrix and after a lapse of some period, the present applicant and the other co-accused persons started physically and mentally torturing the prosecutrix and started abusing her by saying that she came with the present applicant without having solemnized any marriage and without any dowry and the present applicant assaulted the prosecutrix by throwing the mobile phone at the prosecutrix as a result of which the prosecutrix sustained injuries and thereafter, on 10.04.2025, the present applicant left the prosecutrix alone and threatened her not to make any complaint. It was further alleged that the present applicant had solemnized marriage with another woman and thereby the present applicant along with the co- accused persons committed the offence. During the investigation the 3 applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested and a charge- sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that, the applicants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the alleged crime, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. He further contended that as per the FIR the date of the incident is 14.06.2025, however the said incident was reported on 18.07.2025 which apparently reflects much delay in lodging the FIR. On perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is apparent that the prosecutrix herself has admitted that she has resided with the co-accused Pardeep for one year eleven months at his house and during the said period she reported anywhere about any incident whatsoever. He further contended that the present applicants were falsely implicated in the case only because they are the mother and father of the co-accused Pradeep Baghel. Father of the prosecutrix and the Applicant No. 1 namely Babulal Baghel are also having money dispute with regard to a sale transaction of a vehicle and therefore, the prosecutrix falsely implicated the present applicants in the present case. The prosecution has not collected any clinching evidence with regard to the age of the prosecutrix which would show that at the time of the incident the prosecutrix was minor. Looking at the MLC Report prepared by the Medical Expert, there is no injury found over the internal and external part of the body nor any sign of recent sexual intercourse was found, which creates doubt in the case of the prosecution. The present applicants are parents of the co-accused 4 Pradeep who is the main accused in this case and they are jail since 08.09.2025 and chargesheet has already been filed, and in this way, the trial will take long time for its conclusion and if the benefit of regular bail is not extended to the applicants, then their future will be affected. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties, perused the case diary and other materials available on record. 6. In compliance of order dated 17.10.2025, victim has appeared before this Court through video conferencing from the DLSA Sakti. On being asked, she has no objection for grant of bail to the applicants. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by counsel for the parties and further considering the fact that date of incident is 14.06.2025, however the said incident was reported on 18.07.2025 which apparently reflects much delay in lodging the FIR. On perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is apparent that the prosecutrix herself has admitted that she has resided with the present applicant for one year eleven months at his house and during the said period she never reported anywhere about any incident whatsoever and the applicant is in jail since 08.09.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5 8. Let the applicants involved in Crime No.229/2025, registered at Police Station- Dabhara, District Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 3(5), 65(1) read with Section 49 & 54 of BNS and Section 6 read with Section 17 of POCSO Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (each applicant) with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions : (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that tehy 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the 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 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 6 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 him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant