Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61579 (CHH)

KARAN @ ROHAN SARTHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/9429/2025 · 2025-12-18

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:61907 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9429 of 2025 • Karan @ Rohan Sarthi S/o Jogendar @ Kaluram Sarthi Aged About 23 Years R/o Adarsh Nagar Chamda, Godam, Police Station Jutmil, Tahsil And District- Raigarh, C.G. ... Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Jutmil, Tahsil And District- Raigarh, C.G. --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 19/12/2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.262/2023, registered at PS -Jutmil, Tahsil And District- Raigarh, C.G., for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 366(A), 376 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. 2 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that applicant has committed forceful sexual intercourse with minor victim on the pretext of marriage, due to which, she became pregnant. Based upon report, FIR was registered and applicant has been arrested in the aforementioned crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. On the date of alleged incident, victim was major, there was love affair between the applicant and victim. Victim in her court statement has not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. There is no any other criminal antecedent against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 23.10.2025, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposing the bail application of the applicant. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Pursuant to order of this Court, mother of victim appeared through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 7. Considering facts of the case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly the fact there was love affair between the applicant and victim, victim in her Court 3 statement has not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile, mother of victim appeared and raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant, further considering that there is no any other criminal antecedent against the applicant, charge-sheet has already been filed, detention period of applicant, conclusion of trial may take some time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicant shall be released on regular bail, on his furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of concerned Court on the conditions that- a) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. b) Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and c) Applicant shall appear before trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-