1 CGHC010221972026 2026:CGHC:29657 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5177 of 2026 Pradeep Tamrakar S/o Shyam Sundar Tamrakar Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Naila Bhathapara, Ward No. 02, Chauki Naila, P.S. City Kotwali Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Ritesh Verma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasne, G.A. For complainant/mother of the prosecutrix : Shri Basant Dewangan, Advocate. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 14/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as B.N.S.S.) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 52/2026 registered at Police Station – Janjgir, Dist. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 351(3) of B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the POCSO). 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 12.12.2025 the applicant lured the prosecutrix/victim and so maintained love relationship with her and Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.07.14 17:24:39 +0530 2 took her to Madhav Lodge, Janjgir where he forcefully established physical relationship and thereafter on several occasions and when asked by her mother repeatedly, the victim disclosed the factum of forceful intercourse by the applicant. The mother of the victim lodged a report. Based on this, the offence under the aforesaid sections has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and even as per the medical report, no definite opinion could be given by the doctor with regard to alleged offence of sexual intercourse. He further submits that the victim being minor at the time of offence is also not proved by the prosecution. The teacher has also not been examined with regard to age of the prosecutrix. He further submits that there was no entry in the Hotel register to show that the applicant was staying with the victim, which has also not been proved. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.01.2026 and that, the trial is going on and it may take some considerable time to conclude, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that there was entry in the Hotel register to show that the accused was staying with the victim/prosecutrix and committed forceful sexual intercourse with the minor victim, who was below 18 years, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. With the aid of D.L.S.A. Janjgir, the victim and her father are present and both have raised objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicant. Mother of the prosecutrix is also present along with her Advocate. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the material available on record and taking into account that the trial is going on, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is rejected at the admission stage. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for information. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani