1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 392 of 2026 1 - Raju Yadav S/o Jeevan Yadav, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Dabha, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Baharani, P.L. 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 he is arrested in connection with Crime No.495/2024, registered at Police Station – Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and in violation of Section 5(L) Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that the present applicant took the minor victim along with him from 18.11.2024 to 20.11.2024 to different places and HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.01.29 10:23:13 +0530 2 committed sexual assault on her. 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 the victim and the applicant are young and has consensual relationship. The victim has been examined before the trial Court. The applicant is in jail since 22.12.2024, 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 in her statement. The applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl who was aged about 14 to 15 years. In the MLC report hymen was found to be ruptured and redness in the surrounding part; therefore, at this stage, looking to the gravity of the offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. The victim along with her father, appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA and raised their 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 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. 3 8. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 22.12.2024, and out of 18 witnesses, only 7 witnesses have been examined till date, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 5 months from receipt of a copy of this order. 9. 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