1 2026:CGHC:481 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10202 of 2025 Sant Kumar Chouhan S/o Shri Balaram Chouhan Aged About 21 Years R/o Vill- Kotgarh, P.S. And Tah. Akaltara, Dist- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through- S.H.O., P.S. Shivrinarayan, Dist.- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 05.01.2026 1. This is second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No.261 of 2024 registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan District Janjgir Champa (CG) for the offences under ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.01.06 13:59:27 +0530 2 Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. The first bail application has been rejected by order dated 16.06.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.No.3892/2025 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a report was lodged by the complainant on 29.06.2024 to the effect that on 28.06.2024 his daughter was allured and taken away by an unknown person. During investigation, the victim girl was recovered from the house of applicant on 27.12.2024, therefore, the offence was registered against him. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim was a major lady and had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and she was consenting party. He further submits that after rejecting the first bail application, the victim and her mother have been examined before the trial Court and they have become hostile to the prosecution case. He refers to the statement of victim and submits that she has categorically stated that no wrong act was committed by the applicant with her. He further submits that submits that the applicant is in jail since 27.12.2024 and till date out of a total 19 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, looking to the long custody, the applicant may be enlarged on bail at this stage. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor. He further submits that the DNA report is positive and it shows that the 3 victim and accused/application are biological mother and father of the child, therefore, offence has been committed. 6. The victim is not present before the Court despite service of notice. 7. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the statements of victim and her mother as also the fact that the trial is likely to take time and further looking to the long custody of the applicant, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him on regular bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed in that behalf. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao