1 2025:CGHC:56644 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7841 of 2025 Ramdev Sandilya S/o Rajkumar Sandilya Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Jagarnathpur, Police Station- Pratappur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Rajpur District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) (Police Station Name Wrongly Mentioned In Order Sheet As AJAK/ Balrampur In Cause title slip) ---- Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Prachi Diwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 20/11/2025 1. Learned State counsel would submit that pursuant to notice dated 03.11.2025, notice issued to the victim/prosecutrix and her mother has been served upon them. Despite service of notice upon victim and her mother, no one appear to make submission on the bail application of VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.11.21 16:01:23 +0530 2 the applicant, therefore, this Court proceed to hear application of the applicant. 2. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 01.06.2025 in connection with Crime No.123/2025 registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) of BNS, Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Brief facts of this case are that on 31.05.2025, mother of the victim lodged a missing report that her minor daughter is missing since 29.05.2025 and her whereabout could not be tressed out. The police has registered the office under Section 137(2) of the BNS and started investigation. During investigation, the victim was recovered on 01.06.2025 and after recording her statement, the other offences of Sections 87, 64(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act have been added. The applicant has been arrested on 01.06.2025 and charge-sheet has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim is a major girl having love affair with the applicant and she on her own, engaged in making consensual physical relationship with the applicant. Both of them were wanted to marry to each other and she on her own will, eloped with the applicant. There is no forceful act committed by the applicant which comes under the definition of rape. The applicant is 3 in jail since 01.06.2025, during the trial the victim and her mother have been examined and they have not supported the case of prosecution, final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant and submits that the victim was a minor girl aged about 15 years and 08 months and she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the applicant. The applicant is already married and therefore, there is no question of pretext of marriage. The trial of the case is already started and therefore, there is no possibility of any delay in trial, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and other materials available on record. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation, further considering the allegation against the applicant and the fact that the applicant was already married, trial of the case has already been started, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. His bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Vasant