1 2026:CGHC:17011 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2881 of 2026 1 - Chandan Patel S/o Dhanesh Ram Patel Aged About 22 Years R/o Mandir Khilora Ps- Dhamdha, District- Durg (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Ps- Ghumka District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Verma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 13 / 04 / 2026 1. The accused/applicant has moved this Third bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 167/2024 registered at Police Station – Ghumka, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 63(A), 63(D) (iii), 64, 351(2) of BNS and Sections 4, 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2025 in MCRC No. 4070/2025, and the second bail application was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 24.09.2025 in MCRC No. 6897/2025. 3. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged against the applicant that on 09.09.2024 at about 12:00 O’clock, the SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.04.14 13:40:19 +0530 2 applicant/accused threatened the minor victim and forcefully committed sexual intercourse with her. Based on this offence has been registered against the present applicant along with another co-accused person. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He next submits that the only change in circumstances since the dismissal of the second bail application is that six more witnesses have been examined till date, the applicant is in jail since 30.11.2024, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that at the time of incident, the victim was minor and she has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement before the Court. He also submits that there are 14 listed witnesses in this case and only 8 witnesses have been examined, and some important witnesses are still remain to be examined; therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 6. The victim along with her mother appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and raised their objection in granting bail to the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record, the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and also looking to the fact that after dismissal of the second bail application of the applicant, the change of circumstances stated by the counsel for the applicant is not to the effect to grant bail to the applicant, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on 3 merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 10. However, looking to the fact that the applicant is in jail since 30.11.2024, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 04 months. 11. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.