1 CGHC010287872026 2026:CGHC:40669 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6830 of 2026 Arun Bhat S/o Ramkumar Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Kendua, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Ajay Kumar Chandra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Smt. Smriti Shrivastava, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 17/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.412/2025, registered at Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64 of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act. The first bail application was rejected for want of prosecution vide order dated 20.07.2026. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the applicant took away the victim aged about 14 years 10 months and 21 days old from the lawful guardianship of her parents on 10.09.2024 enticing her for marriage and maintained physical relationship. It is further alleged that when the Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.09.18 17:00:08 +0530 2 victim conceived and became pregnant, the applicant refused to perform marriage. On such report, the police lodged F.I.R. and pursuant to which, the offences, as stated above, were registered against him. 3. The victim appeared on 02.09.2026 before this Court and raised no objection in releasing the applicant on bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would argue that the victim and the applicant have already performed marriage and the victim has also been examined before the learned trial Court where she has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is also contended that the victim denied the suggestions put forth by the learned Public Prosecutor. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 08.10.2025 and conclusion of trial may take some considerable time. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and contend that that there are serious allegations made against the present applicant, and therefore, the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the victim and the applicant have already performed marriage; she has already been examined by the trial Court where she has not supported the case of the prosecution and even she denied the suggestions put forth by the Public Prosecutor and considering the fact 3 that the applicant is in jail since 08.10.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some considerable time, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant- Arun Bhat involved in Crime No. 412/2025, registered at Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64 of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, 4 (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani