1 2026:CGHC:14802 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2446 of 2026 1 - Sameer Ghritlahare S/o Vinod Ghritlahare Aged About 19 Years R/o Vill.- Gordha, P.S. Kasdol, Dist.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) (Name Of Applicant Wrongly Mentioned As Samir In The Impugned Order) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 30/03/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 626/2025 registered at Police Station – Kasdol, District Balodabazaar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 78, 296, 308(2), 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that the applicant has helped the main accused, Raj Jangde, in intimidating the victim by showing her photographs with Raj Jangde to her father and HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.03.30 17:50:24 +0530 2 demanding money from her. The applicant allegedly used to call the victim and abuse her using filthy language. The main accused, Raj, is alleged to have committed rape with the minor victim on 17.09.2025 at 7:30 pm, at the village Godhra behind Shakambari School by taking her at an isolated place inside an abandoned house. 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 this case. He further submits that there is a delay of about 23 days in lodging the FIR as the alleged offence took place on 17.09.2025 and the same was reported on 10.10.2025. The main accused is Raj Jangde, and the allegation against the applicant is only that he demanded seven thousand rupees by threatening to show her photographs to her father. The applicant is in jail since 17.10.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude as no witness has been examined till date. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application. However, submits that the allegation against the present applicant is only to threaten the victim and demand money in the name of showing photographs to her father. 5. The mother and father of the victim are present in person before this Court today and recorded no objection in grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the parents of the victim has no objection to grant of bail to the applicant, the applicant is in custody since 17.10.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time as the trial has not commenced yet, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 3 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. Office is directed to send 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