1 2026:CGHC:14776 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2169 of 2026 Hem Kumar Sahu @ Raju Sahu S/o Kuwar Singh Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Armarikala P.S. Sanaud District Balod (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Sanaud District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nande, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 30.03.2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 117/2025 registered at Police Station Sanaud, District Balod (CG) for the offences under Sections 64(2)(M), 65(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 5( ) and 6 of the POCSO Act. of BNS 2023, section 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, the applicant knowing well that the victim was minor girl below the age of 16 years threatened to kill her; established physical relations with her and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.04.01 17:15:41 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that just few days before lodging the FIR on 21.11.2025 against the present applicant Hem Kumar Sahu @ Raju vide Crime No.117/2025 registered at P.S. Sanaud, the same prosecutrix filed similar nature of complaint against juvenile accused (driver of Hem Kumar) on 16.11.2025 in the same police station which was registered as FIR No.110/2025. He submits that in order to save the juvenile accused, a false complaint has been lodged against the applicant Hem Kumar Sahu. Further, there was an inordinate delay in filing the FIR against the applicant much after on 21.11.2025 as the incident is said to have taken place between 05.10.2025 and 26.10.2025. His next contention is that the court statement of victim is not supported by the medical/ MLC report which does not show any sort of injury on prosecutrix to prove the incident. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.11.2025 and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor aged about 14-15 years at the time of incident and in her court statement, she has disclosed that the applicant had established physical relations with her in his house on 05.10.2025 and 26.10.2025. 5. The victim along with her mother has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties; the over-all facts and circumstances and further looking to the court statement of the victim, I am not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao