1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2683 of 2026 1 - Om Prakash Banjare S/o Late Anjori Banjare Aged About 32 Years R/o Dharampur, Police Station Navagarh, District Bemetara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Navagarh, District Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anukul Biswas, Adv. For State : Mr. Afroz Khan, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 02/04/2026 1. This is the second 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. 296/2025 registered at Police Station – Navagarh, District Bemetara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit by this Court on 28.01.2026 in MCRC No. 544/2026. 3. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that the applicant, who is uncle of the victim, knowing fully well that the victim was a minor, forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her on 06.11.2025. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.04.02 16:49:34 +0530 2 4. 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 19 listed witnesses in this case, out of which 2 witnesses, i.e., the victim and her father, have been examined. He also submits that there is overwriting on the victim's date of birth in the Dakhil-Kharij register. As per the MLC report, there is no injury on the body of the victim. In her Court statement, the victim admitted that, prior to this incident, she had previously left with a village boy named Rajkumar but subsequently returned. She further admitted in Para 13 of her statement that the report was lodged because her aunt had become suspicious; moreover, prior to giving her statement in court, she had been taught and instructed by her counsel. The applicant is in jail since 07.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. 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. 6. The victim and her mother appeared through V.C. from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant of bail to the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. 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 07.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. 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 3 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. 10. 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