1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 512 of 2026 1 - Seema Soni W/o Late Naresh Soni Aged About 48 Years R/o Near Bajrang Hotel, Mohan Nagar, Police Station Durg, District Durg (C.G.), Presently Address Room No. 7, Block No. 8, Kachana Adarsh Nagar, Housing Board Colony, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mohan Nagar Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Gyan Prakash Dandekar, Adv. and Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 28/01/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she is arrested in connection with crime No.511/2025, registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 98, 64(2), 115(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1356. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 08.10.2025, an FIR was lodged by the complainant alleging therein that on 03.10.2025, the present applicant along with co-accused Priti, influenced the HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.01.29 10:23:12 +0530 2 victim to indulge in immoral traffic, and three different people sexually assaulted the victim. On the same day, the victim ran away from the place of the incident, and thereafter, the FIR was lodged. Based on the above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that, as per the prosecution's case on 03.10.2025, the rape was committed by three persons, but the said three persons have not been identified, and the three accused rapists have not been arrested. He further submits that the main accused is Priti, who resided in the present applicant's house as a tenant, and that the applicant was not present at the spot. He also submits that in the medical report, no internal or external injuries were found on the body of the victim. The applicant is in jail since 09.10.2025, charge sheet has been filed, and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has supported the case of the prosecution at her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. The applicant committed a heinous offence to indulge the minor victim in moral traffic; the trial has not commenced yet; therefore, at this stage, looking to the nature of the offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. The father of the victim, appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA and raised his objection to grant of bail to the applicant. 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, and overall evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, and also considering the fact that the trial has not commenced yet. 3 Further, looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu