1 2025:CGHC:13100dd NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1316 of 2025 1 - Chandan Soni S/o Shivshankar Soni Aged About 22 Years R/o Vijaynagar (Mahuranpara P.S. Ramanujganj District- Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) Present Address Takiya Road Ambikapur P.S. Kotwali District - Sarguja (C.G.) --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Raghunathpur P.S. Lundra District- Sarguja (C.G.) --- Respondent MCRC No. 1320 of 2025 1 - Chandan Soni S/o Shivshankar Soni Aged About 22 Years R/o Vijaynagar (Mahuranpara P.S. Ramanujgang, District Ramanujgang Chhattisgarh Present Address Takiya Road Ambikapur, P.S. Kotwali, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Raghunathpur P.S. Lundra, Distt. Sarguja Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vidya Bhushan Soni, Advocate For State : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 19.03.2025 1. These are the second bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 84 of BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2025.03.20 10:50:02 +0530 2 2024 registered at Police Station Lundra, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 354, 354(A), 506, 34, 212, 114, 120(B) of the IPC and Sections 8, 17 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(W) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act in MCRC No. 1320 of 2025 and in other Crime No. 85 of 2024 registered at Police Station Lundra, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 354, 354(A), 354(D), 506, 34, 212, 114, 120(B) of the IPC and Sections 8, 17 of the POCSO Act in MCRC No. 1316 of 2025. The record of the case would show that in both the cases two different victims were effected, as such two different crime numbers were registered against the applicant. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that teacher of middle school Junadih Kot has lodged the complaint alleging that on 02.04.2024 her daughter aged about 14 years had gone to school for examination thereafter she did not return to home. It is alleged that her minor daughter was allured and abducted by the co-accused from their lawful guardianship. On the basis of complaint, FIR was registered against the applicant and co-accused under Section 363 of the IPC. During investigation, the victims were recovered at Ranchi Bus stand (Jharkhand) from possession of co-accused Injamamul Haque and Istiyaq Alam, both co-accused have allured the minor girls and took them from Raghunathpur to Jharkhand in a swift car bearing registration No. CG-13 AE 4931 which was driven by the applicant. It is alleged that the applicant provided assistance to the co-accused in committing the offence. Thereafter, offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 354, 354(A), 354(D), 506, 34, 212, 114, 120(B) of the IPC and Sections 8, 17 of the POCSO Act was registered against the applicant. 3 3. The first bail application filed by the applicant in connection with aforestated crime No. 84 of 2024 and crime No. 85 of 2024 bearing MCRC No. 4744 of 2024 and MCRC No. 4724 of 2024 have been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 05.09.2024. 4. Counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case as he has no connection with the commission of offence. He would further submit that the applicant is a college student and part time drives the vehicle therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant was involved in the commission of offence. He would further submit that the statements of the victims were recorded wherein they have nothing stated anything about the applicant. He would further submit that the applicant was not aware whether co-accused were abducted minor girls and on the instruction of the owner of the vehicle dropped the co-accused and the victim at Ranchi Bus stand, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand learned counsel for the State would submit that minor girls were forcefully taken by co-accused Injamamul Haque and Istiyaq Alam in a swift car which was driven by present applicant. He would further submit that the statements of the victims were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC wherein they have stated about the role played by the applicant and would pray for rejection of the bail applications. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. The victims in their statement recorded before the trial Court have stated that the present applicant has neither touched nor any coercive step has been taken against them for insisting sitting in the car and they have also stated that no illegal act has been done by the present applicant. 4 Considering the statement of the victims as also the fact that the applicant is in jail since 03.04.2024, this Court is of the opinion that it is fit case to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, both the bail applications are allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on both the cases on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in each cases for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before that Court as and when so directed. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika