1 2026:CGHC:26651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4789 of 2026 1 - Shailendra Kumar S/o Shivkumar, Aged About 19 Years R/o Jhirvan, Police Station Lormi, Tahsil Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge, Lormi Police Station, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Meera Agrawal Ansari, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 30.06.2026 1. The victim’s father appeared before this Court today through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and objected to grant of 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.23/2026 registered at Police Station Lormi, District Mungeli BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.01 12:36:31 +0530 2 (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 87, 137(2) of BNS and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 3. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 24.03.2026 in MCRC No.1772/2026. 4. As per the prosecution case, the applicant knowing fully well that the victim was a minor, kidnapped her from the lawful guardianship of her parents on 20.01.2026, took her to several places and committed sexual intercourse with her. On report being lodged in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 23.01.2026. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the age of the victim is not proved, she is a consenting party and she had gone with the applicant of her own free will. The medical report of of the victim is also negative. She further submits that out of total 21 witness, only the victim has been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 23.01.2026 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Hence, 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 victim was minor at the time of incident, therefore, her consent is of no relevance/consequence. He further submits that the victim has supported the case of prosecution and considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 3 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the court statement of the victim and also considering the fact that there are total 21 witnesses, out of which only the victim has been examined so far, the applicant is in jail since 23.01.2026 and there is all possibility of the trial taking considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that prima facie, a case for grant of bail to the applicant has been made out. 9. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that the present Applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till completion of the trial. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Khatai JUDGE