1 2026:CGHC:14651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2863 of 2026 Dinesh Kumar Pal S/o Ramnaresh Pal, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village - Jogiyani, Chowki Balangi, P.S. Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, The Police Station Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hardik Jaiswal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer for the State (Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.) Order on Board 27/03/2026 1. Heard. 2. This is the second bail application of the applicant. 2 3. The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits by this Court vide Order dated 05.01.2026 passed in MCrC No. 10209/2025. 4. The applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024 in connection with crime No.106/2024 registered at Police Station – Raghunathnagar, District – Balrampur at Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offences under Section 137(2), 64(2)(m), 65, 61(2), 351(3) of BNS and Section 4(2) and 06 of POCSO Act and is claiming regular bail. 5. The Case of the prosecution is that on 19.10.2024, the mother of the victim lodged a report against the applicant that in the intervening period of 14.10.2024 and 15.10.2024, the applicant took her minor daughter with him by motor cycle and near the river, he repeatedly committed rape upon her. Somehow, the victim get herself free from the clutches of the applicant and reached her house and informed the incident. The FIR has been registered against the applicant in which he has been arrested on 03.12.2024 and charge-sheet has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim and her mother have examined before the learned Trial Court and they have not supported the prosecution’s case, there are no admissible evidence with respect to age of the victim, the applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024. There is no considerable progress in the trial of the case and, therefore, he filed the second bail application. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes and have submitted that the first bail application of the applicant has 3 already been rejected on merits and there is no change in circumstances. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application. 9. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation, age of the victim and also that the first bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits vide order dated 05.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 10209/2025 and on the day, when his first bail application has been rejected, the victim has already been examined on 23.06.2025 as P.W.-1 and her mother has already been examined as P.W.-4 on 06.11.2025, the trial of the case is in progress and 6 witnesses have already been examined up to 19.02.2026, I am not inclined to admit this second bail application of the applicant. 10. Accordingly, it is dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE Sumit