1 CGHC010351272026 2026:CGHC:42718 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8469 of 2026 Gaukarn Barmate S/o Ramesh Barmate Aged About 21 Years R/o- Chalan, P.S. Pathariya, Distt.- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Pathariya, Distt.- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 01/10/2026 1. The applicant has preferred the 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.157/2026, registered at Police Station Pathariya, Dist. Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 64(2)(m) of BNS and under Sections 4(2) & 5(1) of POCSO Act, 2012. 2. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 18.06.2026, an F.I.R. was registered by the mother of the prosecutrix about the missing of the prosecutrix/victim. During course of investigation, the victim informed that the applicant took her away on a motorcycle to Bilaspur where the applicant had married the victim and stayed in rented a Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.10.03 10:19:46 +0530 2 room, in which, the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her. Based on these allegations, the aforesaid offences was registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the victim has been examined under Section 183 of BNSS wherein she did not support the prosecution story. It is further submitted that the MLC report also does not corroborate the prosecution story; charge-sheet has already been filed; he has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 18.06.2026. He would further submit that conclusion of trial may take some considerable time. He would, therefore, pray for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that there are serious allegations made by the victim against the applicant and looking to nature and gravity of offence, the bail application of the present applicant deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the fact that the victim has already been examined and she had supported the case of the prosecution in examination-in-chief wherein she has categorically stated that she was taken away by the present applicant on his motorcycle and they stayed in Bilaspur where present applicant sexually exploited her many times and further having 3 considered the fact that at the time of incident the victim’s age was 15 years and 9 months and looking to the allegations made by the victim against the applicant in her Court statement recorded on 24.08.2026, I am not inclined to grant bail to the appellant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani