1 CGHC010195432026 2026:CGHC:28261 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4651 of 2026 1 - Karan @ Dularelal Agariya S/o Pyarelal Agariya Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Bargavan Chowki Belgehna Police Station Kota District Bilaspur C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Kota District Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 08 / 07 / 2026 1. The accused/applicant has moved this Second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 790/2024 registered at Police Station – Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(M), 65(1), 351(2), 308(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2), 5(B)/6 of POCSO Act. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit on 04.07.2025 in MCRC No. 3599 of 2025. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.09 10:07:38 +0530 2 3. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that from 20.08.2024 to 20.09.2024, the applicant committed forceful sexual intercourse with the minor victim. Further, it is alleged that the applicant threatened the victim to kill and demanded Rs. 20,000/- from her. Based on this offence has been registered against the present applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that his main ground is to move this second bail is that there is a delay in the trial, as on 04.07.2025, when the first bail of the applicant was decided by this Court, 5 witnesses out of 19 witnesses were examined, and the trial Court was directed to expedite the trial, but till now only 07 witnesses have been examined, the applicant is in jail since 03.10.2024, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has clearly supported the case of the prosecution. He also submits that the applicant committed a heinous offence with a minor girl, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 6. On 03.07.2026, the victim and her father were present in person before this Court and raised objection to grant of bail to the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record, the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of crime, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 9. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 03.10.2024 and only 7 witnesses out of 19 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 4 months from the receipt of a copy of this order. 10. 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