1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 329 of 2026 Sunil Kumar Yadav S/o - Gulabchand Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o - Village - Marma Bajnapara, Out-Post - Dindo, P.S. - Trikunda, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O Police Station - Trikunda, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 31/01/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second 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. 18/2025, registered at Police Station – Trikunda, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 376 (2)(n) of IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2 2. First bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 11.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4741 of 2025. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on the night of 15.06.2023, the victim had gone to her village to attend the marriage ceremony of her friend and the applicant/accused Sunil Yadav also came there and at 4 a.m. the applicant/accused took the minor victim from the marriage venue to the nearby forest and raped her. Thereafter, the applicant/accused, knowing the victim to be a member of the Scheduled Tribe, raped her more than once at different times and places thereafter refused to marry the victim. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. There was a love affair between the applicant and the victim and due to dispute taken place between them, a false report has been lodged by the victim against the applicant. He further submits that out of 21 listed witnesses Three witnesses i.e. the Victim, her mother and her maternal uncle, have been examined, who do not support the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. The applicant is in jail since 15.04.2025, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. Today, the victim along with her elder sister appeared through V.C. from the DLSA Balrampur, and they have recorded no objection to the grant 3 of bail to the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the victim, her mother and her maternal uncle have been examined before the trial Court, the applicant is in custody since 15.04.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. 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. 10. 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 Saurabh