1 CGHC010160922026 2026:CGHC:39901 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.3912 of 2026 Aslam Khan S/o Late Mansoor Ahmed, Aged About 48 Years R/o Mahatma Gandhi Ward, Kondagaon -P.S. Kondagaon, District -Kondagaon C.G. --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Kondagaon. District Kondagaon C.G. --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 4062 of 2026 Salim Memon S/o Late Mansoor Ahmad Aged About 48 Years R/o Mahatma Gandhi Ward, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For MCRC No.3912 of 2026 For Applicant : Shri Raza Ali, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Aman Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer For Complainant : Shri Karunendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For MCRC No.4062 of 2026 For Applicant : Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate with Shri Rahul Ambast, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Aman Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer For Complainant : Shri Karunendra Narayan Singh, Advocate SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE Date: 2026.09.18 15:58:30 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11/09/2026 1. Heard. 2. Since both these bail applications (MCRC No.3912 & 4062) arise out of same Crime No.51/2026, they are being disposed of by this common order. 3. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.51/2026, registered at Police Station Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 62, 64 & 64(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act. 4. On 09.07.2026, the victim in the aforesaid bail applications appeared with the aid of DLSA Kondagaon and raised objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicants. 5. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has lodged a complaint dated 31.01.2026 before the police station and made allegation that one Salim Memon had sexually exploited the complainant on 09.11.2025 while taking her to the forest of Village Karsing in his car. On the basis of written complaint, an FIR has been registered at Police Station Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (CG) against that accused Salim Memon for the offences under section 62, 64 and 64 (2) of BNS and Sections 6, 7 & 8 of POCSO Act. The copy of FIR annexed as ANNEXURE A-2. Thereafter, in her second statement, the prosecutrix has added the name of the applicant-Aslam Khan also and stated that the said accused on 08.01.2026 had come to the house of the complainant at 2.00 PM during day time and made 3 physical relationship with her. On the basis of said complaint, the police of Police Station Kondagaon, District Kondgaon has registered the offence against the applicant-Aslam Khan for the offences mentioned above and thereafter, both the applicants were arrested. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respective applicant would contend that the applicants are innocent and falsely implicated in this case. It is also submitted that there are contradictions and omissions in the statements of victim recorded under Section 180 & 183 of BNSS. It is further submitted that FIR has been registered against the present applicants on baseless and fabricated grounds only to take vengeance. It is also submitted that there is no material available on record, which constitutes prima facie commission of offence of rape. It is also submitted that there is a delay of two months in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that the applicants are in jail since 14.02.2026 and 16.02.2026, therefore, it is prayed that the applicants may be released on regular bail. 7. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the complainant oppose the bail application of the applicants and submit that the victim has categorically stated that she was sexually exploited by the applicants herein. He also submits that the issue of age of the victim is a matter, which is pending consideration before the learned trial Court, therefore, this bail application deserves to be rejected. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all the documents available on record. 9. It is contended by learned counsel appearing for the respective applicants that on the date of incident, the victim was a major girl, but the issue with regard to age of the victim cannot be adjudicated in 4 absence of evidence at this stage. The victim in her statement has categorically made allegations against the present applicants. In the statement recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNSS, she has made serious allegations against the present applicants and stated that she was taken to forest and was sexually exploited. Subsequently, another accused-Aslam Khan entered into the house of the prosecutrix and sexually exploited her on 08.01.2026. The authenticity or reliability of the statement of the victim cannot be appreciated at this stage and it is for the learned trial Court to do the same. An affidavit has been filed by the father and mother of the victim to indicate that no such incident had taken place. It appears that the present applicants have induced the witnesses to give an affidavit in favour of the present applicants, and such act weakens their case. As per the case of the prosecution, the date of birth of the victim is 26.01.2008, thus, on the date of incident, i.e., she was minor. The documents, which have been placed along with the bail application No.4062 of 2026 cannot be looked into, as those documents are not part of the charge-sheet. 10. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and the material available on record and further considering the age of the victim on the date of incident, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present applicants. 11. Accordingly, the aforesaid bail applications (MCRC Nos.3912 of 2026 and 4062 of 2026) of the applicants are dismissed. SD/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Tumane