1 2026:CGHC:27514 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3958 of 2026 1 - Markush Kachchhap S/o- Tilakdhari Kachchhap, Aged About 35 Years R/o- Village Tengari, Police Station Bargarh District- Gahdhwa (Jharkhand) (State Name CG Wrongly Mentioned In Cause Title Of Order Sheet) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Dr. Prachi Diwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Deepa Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 03/07/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed u/s 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.83/2025 registered at Police Station Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1) BNS and Sections 4 (2) & 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.06 10:32:05 +0530 2 2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh after some time vide order dated 17.02.2026 in MCRC No.729/2026. 3. As per the prosecution case, on 09.06.2025, when the minor victim had gone to the nearby river to take a bath, the applicant came there and took her on his motorcycle to his house at Village - Tengari, P.S.-Badgarh, Jharkhand. It is alleged that the applicant kept the victim with him from 09.06.2025 to 20.06.2025 and during the said period committed sexual intercourse with her about six occasions. On report being lodged in this regard by the father of the victim, the applicant was arrested on 22.06.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the victim was a consenting party, as a love affair existed between them and the victim had gone with the applicant of her own free will. It is further submitted that the victim has been examined before the Trial Court and, in her cross-examination, she has categorically stated that after the applicant (Markush) was sent to jail in connection with the present case and she had returned to her home, she again went to reside at the applicant's house without informing her family members. She has further deposed that after about a week, the applicant's sister took her to the police station. Learned counsel further submits that, out of a total of 16 prosecution witnesses, only the victim has been examined so far, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 3 22.06.2025 and that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was a minor, aged below 16 years, at the time of the alleged incident; therefore, her consent is legally inconsequential. It is further submitted that the victim has supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief and, having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the alleged offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 6. The victim is not connected from the concerned DLSA though notice has been served. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant at this stage. 9. Consequently, the present bail application stands rejected. 10. However, considering the fact that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 22.06.2025, the Trial Court is directed to make every endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of 4 receipt of a certified copy of this order, without being influenced by any observations made herein on the merits of the case. 11. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai