1 2026:CGHC:26036 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3645 of 2026 Anil Muchaki S/0 Deva Muchaki Aged About 20 Years R/o Kosabandar, P.S. And District Sukma C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sukma District Sukma C.G. ---- Respondent (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ___________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate For State-Respondent : Mr. Hrishikesh Sharma, PL ___________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 25/06/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.31/2025, registered at Police Station Sukma, District- Sukma (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(2), 64(2)(m), 65(1) of BNS and Section 4(2), 6 of POCSO Act. VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2026.06.25 16:50:10 +0530 2 2. As per prosecution case, in the month of July, 2024, the victim was forcibly taken on a motorcycle by the accused along with his minor companion, to a location behind District Hospital Sukma, where they committed rape and thereafter fled away from the spot. On 23.12.2024, the accused again forcibly made sexual intercourse with the victim near a garbage dump, due to which she became pregnant. Based on these facts, FIR was registered against the applicant and during investigation, the applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in the said case. He further contended that the report was lodged after nine months from the date of incident and DNA report is also not supporting the case of prosecution and the applicant is in jail since 01.05.2025 and the trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that at the time of incident, the victim was below 16 years of age. She further contended that the applicant along with other child in conflict with law has committed sexual intercourse with the victim. 5. Pursuant to order dated 22.04.2026, victim and her mother appeared through virtual mode from the Civil Court, Sukma. On 3 being asked, they raised objection for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record and looking to the nature and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected. 9. However, this Court hopes and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Vasant