1 CGHC010222792026 2026:CGHC:30643 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5365 of 2026 Bhojraj Choudhari S/o Jageshwar Aged About 28 Years, Resident of Village Bilaigarh, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Gunja Taram, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Nand Kumari Kashyap, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 20/07/2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.127/2026, registered at Police Station - Saraipali, District - Mahasamund, (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 64 (2) (m), 65 (1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. In compliance of order dated 19.06.2026, the victim is present along with her father through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA, and on being ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.07.21 11:38:40 +0530 2 asked, they have raised ‘no objection’ on the application filed by the applicant for grant of bail. 3. As per the prosecution case, the victim, a minor girl, left her house on 11.04.2026 without informing her family. During the course of investigation, she was recovered from the company of the applicant at a hotel in Raipur. It is alleged that the applicant had induced the victim on the pretext of marriage, stayed with her in the hotel from 12.04.2026 to 14.04.2026, and established physical relations with her. On the basis of the victim's statement and the material collected during the investigation, the applicant was arrested for the alleged offences. Since the matter is sensitive in nature, the FIR has not been uploaded on the official website, and therefore, the applicant has not filed a copy of the FIR. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.04.2026 and conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, applicant may be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. She further submits that victim is a minor girl, aged about 12 years. It is alleged that the applicant kidnapped the victim on the false promise of marriage and repeatedly committed rape upon her. The other collected during investigation prima facie establish the involvement of the application in the alleged offences, and therefore, considering the gravity and seriousness of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, and material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Arpan