1 CGHC010247722026 2026:CGHC:34857 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5890 of 2026 1 - Sanjay Naurang S/o Manglu Naurang Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Borsi, P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board 07.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Surakasha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested on 07.05.2026 in connection with Crime No. 375/2024, registered at Police Station Pamgarh, Janjgir District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64, 64(2)(m), 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that victim’s father lodged a written complaint alleging that on 27.04.2008 the victim who is aged ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.08.10 10:42:05 +0530 2 about 16 years and 4 months old was sleeping along with her family members and when the family members woke up at about 5:00 a.m., they found that the victim was missing from the house. Despite making diligent searches, the informant and his family could not trace the victim, thereafter a missing report was lodged before the concerned police station. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He would further submit that the victim was recovered, her statement was recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, wherein she stated that she has solemnized marriage with the applicant and out of their wedlock, they have been blessed with one child. He would further submit that the victim had voluntarily accompanied and travelled with the applicant to various places and, therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. He would further submit that no prima facie case under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 and 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is available on record out against the applicant. It was also submitted that the applicant and the applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate bail bonds and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court and would pray for releasing the applicant on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and would submit that the allegations levelled against the applicant are serious in nature and are supported by the materials collected during the course of investigation. He would further submit that the victim was a 3 minor girl at the time of the alleged occurrence and was enticed away by the applicant and statement of the victim clearly discloses the involvement of the applicant in the crime in question. He would further submit that the plea of consent or subsequent marriage with the applicant is of no legal consequence in view of the minority of the victim at the relevant time and would pray for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the victim who was minor at the time of the alleged occurrence and also the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, I am not inclined to grant the bail to the applicant at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, the applicant is at liberty to revive the bail application after recording of some evidence. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge arpan