1 2026:CGHC:8931 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1375 of 2026 Banti Yadav S/o Late Shri Manharan Yadav Aged About 27 Years R/o Village- Chirmiri Ward No.21, Dhakka Dafai, P.S. Chirmiri Dist- M.C.B. (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 : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 19.02.2026 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. 63/2023 registered at Police Station Shrivrinarayan (CG) for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 367(2) (n) of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the applicant is that on 06.02.2023 he had taken away the complainant’s minor daughter/victim with an intention to seduce her into illicit sexual intercourse and committed rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her on multiple occasions between 6.2.2023 and 12.2.2023 without her consent or will. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim herself left her house and started residing with the applicant for 7 2 days and the present applicant has not pressurized her. He submits that the victim and applicant were in love relations and on the pressure of her family members, she has stated against him. He further submits that the victim was recovered when she was brought to the police station by her father and not from direct possession of the applicant. He further submits that the statement of victim was recorded after a long time on 09.01.2024 wherein for the first time his name was reflected. The MLC was conducted with a delay of 11 months on 12.11.2025 and after more than 2 ½ years of the incident, the applicant has been arrested on 17.11.2025. He further submits that although the victim is stated to be minor, evidence of correct age has not been collected by the prosecution. He eventually submits that applicant is in jail since 17.11.2025; trial has not commenced and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident. He submits that the victim had gone for the second time also, therefore, her statement could not be recorded in time. 5. The victim was not connected to VC therefore her statement could not be recorded regarding objection/non-objection to grant bail. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the trial has not yet commenced, I am not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao