1 CGHC010278612026 2026:CGHC:40469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6533 of 2026 1 - Sukhdev Mohle S/o Sadhelal Mohle Aged About 26 Years R/o Bamhni Thana Bazar Charbhatha Distt- Kabeerdham (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, Thana Bemetara, Distt- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Arvind Prasad, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 16.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 58/2026, registered at Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 65(1) and 64(2)(m) and 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the father of the prosecutrix lodged a report on 02.02.2026 at the concerned Police Station, alleging that his daughter had gone missing on Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.09.17 17:14:01 +0530 2 30.01.2026. She was subsequently recovered from the possession of the accused on 09.03.2026, whereafter an allegation of rape was made against the applicant. Pursuant to the report lodged by the father of the prosecutrix, the FIR was registered against the applicant for the offences as stated above. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the victim and the applicant were known to each other, but no offence as alleged was committed by the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 02.02.2026. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the victim was aged about 15 years, 2 months and 27 days at the time of the incident and has already been examined before the Trial Court, wherein she has supported the prosecution case. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and, therefore, application moved by the applicant for grant of bail may be rejected. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. It is a well-settled principle of law that a mini-trial is not permissible at the stage of entertaining the bail application. The reliability and credibility of the evidence cannot be examined at 3 this stage. The age of the victim can be ascertained by the learned Trial Court after going through the evidence available on record. 7. Having considered the fact that the victim, in her statement recorded before the learned Trial Court, has made serious allegations against the present applicant with regard to sexual assault, and further considering the fact that she was aged about 15 years, 2 months and 27 days at the time of the incident, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Jyoti