1 2025:CGHC:6066 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 922 of 2025 Krishna Shivhare S/o Late Ramesh Shivhare Aged About 34 Years R/o Geedam Thana Geedam Distt. Dantewada C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Thana Geedam Distt.- Dantewada C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2025 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 105/2024, registered at Police Station : Geedam Distt.- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 63/62, 74, 76, 79, 115(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.02.03 17:57:03 +0530 2 Court in MCRC No. 8431 of 2024 vide order dated 03.12.2024 on merits, considering the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNS wherein she has deposed against the applicant for outraging her modesty and causing injuries to her and as per the medical evidence, wherein it is disclosed that the victim suffered contusion in left arm, multiple abrasions were found in her body and tenderness on lower abdomen. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that, the present applicant continuously chased the victim and on 11.10.2024 at about 10 pm, he entered her house and tried to outrage her modesty and also assaulted her husband along with his friends. Upon receiving such complaint, FIR has been lodged and during the investigation, applicant was arrested. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. He would further submit that the statement of the Victim has already been recorded by the trial Court and so far as the abovementioned offences are concerned, she has turned hostile. The applicant is in jail since 13.10.2024, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNS, 3 there is an allegation against the applicant for commission of rape, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of X Vs. State of Rajasthan and another in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 13378 of 2024 decided on 27-11-2024 has observed in the said order that.- "14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused." 15. Over a period of time, we have noticed two things, i.e., (i) either bail is granted after the charge is framed and just before the victim is to be examined by the prosecution before the trial court, or (ii) bail is granted once the recording of the oral evidence of the victim is complete by looking into some discrepancies here or there in the deposition and thereby testing the credibility of the victim.” 16. We are of the view that the aforesaid is not a correct practice that the Courts below should adopt. Once the trial commences, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion which may either result in the conviction of the accused or acquittal of the accused. The moment the High Court exercises its discretion in favour of the accused and orders release of the accused on bail by looking into the deposition of the victim, it will have its own impact on the pending trial when it comes to 4 appreciating the oral evidence of the victim. It is only in the event if the trial gets unduly delayed and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, the Court may be justified in ordering his release on bail on the ground that right of the accused to have a speedy trial has been infringed." 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, there is an allegation against the applicant for commission of rape, further the trial is in progress and evidence of the victim has already been recorded, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 9. 9. Accordingly, this second bail application of applicant – Krishna Shivhare, involved in Crime No. 105/2024, registered at Police Station : Geedam Distt.- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 63/62, 74, 76, 79, 115(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 11. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet