1 2026:CGHC:11677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1779 of 2026 Vikram Kumar Sahu @Vickky S/o Pritam Kumar Sahu Aged About 29 Years Resident Of Kutharel, Police Station Anda, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Of Police Suregaon District- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Verma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/03/2026 1. Mother of the victim appeared virtually on 03.03.2026 and recorded ‘no objection’ in granting bail to the applicant. 2. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 08/2025, registered at Police Station – Suregaon, District- Balod (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 351(3), 64(2)(m) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in beief, is that a missing report was lodged by the father of the victim and stating therein that he came to attend the marriage on 02-02-2025 along with his daughter i.e. victim who was SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.03.12 10:58:39 +0530 2 aged about 16-17 years at the time of incident and on 03-02-2025 at about 11.00 AM, without informing any family members, she left the house. On 26-02-2025, the complainant himself produced the victim in the Police Station. Thereafter, on 27-02-2025, the victim again left the house without telling anything to her family members. Thereafter in her supplementary statement, she stated that the present applicant on 03- 02-2025 taken her along with him and established physical relationship with her. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 13.11.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The applicant is in jail since 13.11.2025. Out of 24 prosecution witnesses, only 4 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, detention period of the applicant, statement of the victim, no objection in granting bail on the side of the victim and the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 9. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge