1 2026:CGHC:7361 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 139 of 2026 Rinku Urf Narendra Kumar Sarvansh S/o Ram Ratan Sarvansh Aged About 25 Years R/o Khaira Daganiya, P.S. Sipat, District Bilaspur, C.G. Current Address - Kanberi, P.S. Urga, District Korba, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Urga, District Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. Suresh Ku. Verma, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. KK Bahrani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 10/02/2026 1. The victim and her father appeared virtually and recorded ‘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. 296/2025, registered at Police Station – Urga, District- Korba (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 69, 65(1), 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f) of BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 13.04.2025, the applicant induced the minor victim and alleged to have committed sexual SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.02.11 15:50:01 +0530 2 intercourse with her more than once when she was not in the age consent. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 11.08.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The medical evidence have not supported the case of prosecution. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.08.2025, out of 15 prosecution witnesses only 5 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take some 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, her statement was recorded before the Trial Court and she supported the case of prosecution, 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 against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9. However, looking to the detention period of the applicant, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham