1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9572 of 2025 Arjun Baghel S/o Nemichand Baghel, (Wrongly Mentioned As Memichand Baghel) Aged About 20 Years R/o Dongariya, Police Station Hathband, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station Simga, Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For the State : Mr. G.L. Ukey, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 15.12.2025 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. 71/2025 registered at Police Station Police Chowki Hathband, P.S. Simga, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (CG) for the offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(5), 65(1) of BNS and Sections 4, 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. The earlier bail application has been dismissed by order dated 18.06.2025 passed in MCRC No.3877 of 2025 which records the fact that on 16.06.2025 the victim along-with her mother had appeared through VC and not objected to grant bail to the applicant. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.12.16 10:08:14 +0530 2 3. The prosecution case, in brief. is that on 15.04.2025, the mother of prosecutrix lodged a report in Police Chowki, Hathband about missing of her daughter and during course of investigation, the victim was recovered from the custody of the applicant. On the basis of the said report, the offence was registered and the applicant has been arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of the first bail application, the victim, her mother and brother have been examined and they have not categorically supported the prosecution case. He refers to paras 8, 9, 10 & 11 of victim’s cross examination and submits that the victim and applicant came to be acquainted with each other, there were conversations between them on mobile phone which developed love relations between them and thereafter they started living with each other as wife and husband. It is further submitted that although the prosecutrix is stated to be minor yet the evidence of correct age has not been proved. He further submits that even the medical report also does not show forcible sexual intercourse and the victim was a consenting party. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 22.4.2025; till date out of a total 16 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail at this stage. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor girl and in her chief-examination, she has supported the prosecution case. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the statements of the victim, her mother and brother as also looking to the custody period of the applicant and the fact that the trial is likely to take time, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail at this stage. 3 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant Arjun Baghel 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