1 2026:CGHC:10896 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1654 of 2026 1 - Manish Kumar Rajwade S/o Krishna Kumar Rajwade Aged About 22 Years R/o Girwarganj, P.S. Bishrampur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Bishrampur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Baharani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 02/03/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.294/2025, registered at Police Station – Bishrampur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 65(1), 79, 332 of BNS and Section 4 & 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 18.12.2025, the mother of the victim lodged a report stating therein that the applicant knowing that her daughter is a minor, lured her and made HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.03.03 10:19:20 +0530 2 physical relation with her daughter twice on 21.10.2025 and 25.10.2025 by giving her false promise of marriage and also threatened her daughter by calling her that he will make her photo and video viral. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 21.10.2025, whereas the FIR has been lodged on 18.12.2025 after a delay of about 2 months, which is inordinate, unexplained and fatal to the prosecution case. He also submits that on the alleged incident dates, the applicant was not present at the alleged place of occurrence, but was regularly attending his duty in his company, Chennai Radha Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. at village Badli, Jhajjar (Hariyana) as an operator, he has filed biometric attendance sheet, to this effect. The applicant is in jail since 19.12.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient material available on record against the present applicant, the applicant committed grave offence with the minor victim and the victim has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under Sections 180, 183 of BNSS and also in the Court statement’ some important witnesses have yet to be examined, therefore, at this stage, looking to the gravity of the offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 6. No one appeared on behalf of the victim, though notice has been served. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the material available on record against the applicant and also looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu