1 2026:CGHC:15054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2511 of 2026 1 - Sagar Dewangan S/o Late Ramkumar Dewangan Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Shankar Nagar, Behind Sindhi Colony, Nawapara, Gobra, P.S. Gobra, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Rudri, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Adv. For State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 01/04/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 63/2025 registered at Police Station – Rudri, District Dhamtari (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 62(2)(M), 351(1) of BNS and Sections 14, 15(1) & 6 of POCSO Act (as per charges framed), under Sections 62(2)(m) of BNS and Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act (as per FIR). 2. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that on 07.05.2025, HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.04.01 17:07:14 +0530 2 the applicant, who is the brother-in-law of the victim, committed forcible sexual intercourse with her at Vrindavan Resort Gangrel, Dhamtari (C.G.). Later on, the applicant showed the victim her obscene photos on the mobile phone and threatened her by stating that he would make those photos viral and again on 20.09.2025, the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there are a total of 12 listed witnesses in this case, out of which only one witness, i.e., the victim, has been examined, who has not supported the prosecution's case, and the medical test is also negative. There is a delay in lodging the FIR as the FIR was lodged on 13.12.2025, whereas the incident is alleged to have taken place from 07.05.2025 to 20.09.2025. The applicant is in jail since 13.12.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that the victim was minor at the time of incident and she has supported the case of the prosecution at her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. 5. The victim and her father appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the Court statement of the victim, and also considering the fact that the applicant is in custody since 13.12.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to 3 release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. Office is directed to send 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