1 2026:CGHC:7880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1047 of 2026 Suraj Kumar Khunte S/o Ramchandra Khunte , Aged About 22 Years R/o Borjhara Amapara Police Station Bhakhara, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Dugli District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 12.02.2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 26/2025 registered at Police Station Dugli, District Dhamtari (CG) for the offences u/s 137(2), 87, 64(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children fromSexual Offences, Act, 2012. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.02.13 16:36:47 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, on 06.10.2025, the victim left her house to attend the school and did not return to home. On 12.10.2025, the father of the victim lodged report alleging that an unknown person had forcibly taken away his minor daughter from their lawful custody. On such report, the crime was registered and during investigation, the victim was recovered and the applicant was arrested on 07.11.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim girl has been examined before the trial Court wherein she had categorically stated in her cross examination that no offence was committed by the applicant with her and she had voluntarily accompanied the applicant, therefore, she has not supported the prosecution case. He further submits that though the prosecutrix is stated to be minor of 17 to 18 years of age, yet the evidence of correct age has not been collected by the prosecution to prove her minority. He further submits that there was inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 07.11.2025 and till date out of a total 22 witnesses, only 1 witness i.e., victim has been examined and and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor; the applicant had forcibly taken her away from the lawful custody of her parents; committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage and she became pregnant and the applicant got her pregnancy aborted. 3 5. The victim along with her father has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA. The victim has expressed no-objection to grant bail to the applicant whereas her father has raised objection to bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, over all facts situation of the case and further looking to the court statement of the victim, without observing anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal 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