1 CGHC010239472026 2026:CGHC:28700 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5898 of 2026 Ashish Jatwar S/o Jivan Jatwar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Khamhariya, P.S. Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 09/07/2026 1. The victim along with her father appeared before this Court today and raised objection in granting bail to the Applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 2nd 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.180/2025, registered at Police Station – Jarhagaon, District-Mungeli (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) & (2) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. First bail of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 16.04.2026 passed in MCRC no.3172/2026. 4. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 19.11.2025, grandfather of minor victim lodged report to the concerned Police Station mentioning therein that her minor granddaughter/victim (aged about 16 years and 9 months) went missing from the house. Based upon report, FIR was SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.10 10:44:02 +0530 2 registered and during course of investigation, the victim was recovered on 21.12.2025 from the possession of the present applicant. Her statement was recorded and, based upon which, crime was registered against the applicant for the aforementioned offence. 5. 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 age of the victim has not been proved. Further, there was a love affair between the applicant and the victim and she was a consenting party. The Applicant has been in custody since 22.12.2025. Out of 19 prosecution witnesses, only 4 have been examined till date, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for conclusion. In view of the above, it is prayed that the Applicant may be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor and she supported the prosecution’s case, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be granted benefit of bail. 7. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution, the period of detention of the Applicant and the statement of the victim, and further considering that the trial is likely to take considerable time for conclusion, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 10. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham