1 2026:CGHC:5464 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 474 of 2026 Ayub Tirkey S/o Vishram Tirkey Aged About 26 Years Resident Of Village- Bhandar Para, Dumrbahra, Police Station And Tahsil- Baikunthpur, District- Korea (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Baikunthpur, District- Korea (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. DN Prajapati, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Aman Tamboli, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 31/01/2026 1. The victim along with her father appeared virtually through concerned DLSA and recorded ‘objection’ in granting bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st 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. 281/2025, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District- Korea (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 64, 65(1), 351(3), 79, 332(B) of BNS and Sections 6 & 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that in between 20.07.2025 to 13.08.2025, the accused/applicant on multiple times committed forceful SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.02.02 11:36:50 +0530 2 sexual intercourse with the victim who is minor. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 18.08.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question due to land dispute. The medical evidence has not supported the case of prosecution. There was a delay in lodging the FIR. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 18.08.2025, out of 17 prosecution witnesses only 3 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of 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. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham