1 2026:CGHC:8881 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1094 of 2026 Bhojram Shriwas @ Rikki Sen @ Vickcky S/o Shri Santosh Shrivas Aged About 23 Years R/o Vill- Jarwe, P.S. Nagarda, Distt.- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O., P.S. Janjgir, Distt.- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Vinod Tekam, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 19.02.2026 1. The victim’s father appeared before this Court today through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised objection in granting bail to the applicant. 2. This is the second bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.694/2024 registered at Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) for the offence punishable under BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.02.20 10:33:44 +0530 2 Sections 107, 65, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act. 3. The first bail application of the applicant and co-accused Paleshwar was rejected on merits vide order dated 17.06.2025 in MCRC No.3012/2025. This is the second bail application of applicant Bhojram Shriwas. 4. As per the prosecution case, on 03.09.2024, the applicant along with co-accused committed forcible sexual intercourse with the minor girls in village Khokhra and abetted them to commit suicide, due to which they consumed pesticides which resulted in death of one girl out of the two. Subsequently, on the report being lodged in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 04.09.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim has been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. He submits that the applicant did not abet the victims to commit suicide. Rather the victims consumed poison out of fear due to the presence of a large crowd at the place of incident. The applicant has no role in the commission of offence. He further submits that there are total 36 witnesses out of which only 6 have been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Therefore, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 6. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the first bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits and there has been no subsequent change in circumstances. He submits that one victim died by consuming pesticides, leading to a charge of abetment of suicide against the applicant. The father (PW-4) and brother (PW-5) of the victim have supported the case of 3 prosecution. Therefore, considering all these facts and the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the court statements of the victim’s father (PW-4) and brother (PW-5), the nature and gravity of offence, the material collected and available on record against the applicant and further considering the fact that no change in circumstances has been made out after rejection of the first bail application on merits, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application stands rejected. 10. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2024 and out of total 36 witnesses only 6 have been examined so far, the Trial Court is directed to ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible preferably within a period of 5 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai