1 2025:CGHC:10249 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1216 of 2025 1 - Tarun Kumar Sahu S/o Rakesh Kumar Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Bhengari, P.S Balod District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Binu Sharma Panel Laywer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 03.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested on 15.11.2024 in connection with Crime No. 578/2024, registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 (2) & 65 of BNS, 2023 and Sections 5(l) & 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant has committed ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 forcible sexual intercourse on multiple occasions with the prosecutrix on pretext of marriage. The prosecution submits that the victim, a minor under the age of 18, was lured away from her lawful guardian's custody by the accused, who was fully aware of her age and status as a minor. The accused, through deceit and manipulation, enticed the victim and took her away without the consent of her legal guardian, thereby depriving her of her lawful guardian's custody. Thereafter, the applicant has been arrested by the Police and the offence was registered. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedent against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the statement of the victim has already been recorded and she has not supported the prosecution case. Victim’s statement neither established any substantial evidence nor she knows the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 15.11.2024 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the prosecutrix/victim aged less than 18 years, allegations against the applicant is serious in nature and the present applicant has committed forcible sexual intercourse with victim, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. Mr. Yogesh Chandra, Advocate, who is present in the Court is appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court on behalf of the victim, after going through the documents available on record, Mr. Chandra, 3 opposes the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant for grant of bail. Further, father of the victim heavily opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no criminal antecedents against the present applicant, charge- sheet has been filed against the applicant. Statement of the victim has already been recorded in which she has not supported the prosecution case and he is in jail since 17.08.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Tarun Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 578/2024, registered at Police Station – Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 (2) & 65 of BNS, 2023 and Sections 5(l) & 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under 4 Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Saxena