1 2025:CGHC:58959 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9624 of 2025 Chhotu Ram S/o Ram Swarup Bhuiya Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Meetgai, Police Thana Ramanujganj District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Akhat Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Afroz Khan, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 04.12.2025 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. 165/2024 registered at Police Station Ramanujganj District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) for the offences ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.12.05 16:15:19 +0530 2 under Sections 376(3) of IPC and Section 4(2), 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. The first bail application has been dismissed by order dated 11.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.4576 of 2025. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 02.02.2024 at about 7.00 pm, when the minor victim girl aged about 14 years went towards the pond of her village, the applicant accused Chhotu Ram came there and caught the victim, threw her on the ground and committed rape on her and thereafter the victim went to her house and due to public shame the victim did not disclose the incident to anyone. Thereafter, the applicant allured the minor victim and had physical relations with her several times due to which she became pregnant. After few months, when the victim’s mother enquired the matter, the victim told about the said incident and due to fear of defamation, the said incident was not reported at that time time. The victim gave birth to a female child in Government Hospital Balrampur. On 22.09.2024, the mother of victim lodged a report of the above incident, on which, the offence has been registered. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits there was an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. It is further submitted that even as per the DNA test report (Annexure A-4) the applicant is not the biological father, therefore, the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.09.2024 and till date out of a total 20 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and there is no 3 immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, looking to the long custody period, the applicant may be enlarged on bail, at this stage. 5. Per contra learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the minor victim has been examined and she has clearly supported the prosecution case. 6. The victim along with her mother has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSC and objected to grant of bail to the applicant. 7. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the statement of the victim, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 8. However, looking to the long custody period of the applicant and the fact that the trial is likely to take time, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as early as possible preferable within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 9. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao 4