2026:CGHC:8421 MANPREET KAUR NAFR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.17 17:52:37 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1057 of 2026 Suraj Yadav S/o Shri Kanshiram Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Taraud, P.S. Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

... Applicant(s)

versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Order On Board

17.02.2026

1. The applicant has preferred this second 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.39/2025, registered at Police Station – Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the BNS and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit on 20.06.2025 in MCRC No. 3320/2025.

3. As per the prosecution's case, the complainant lodged a report that her daughter studies in the 10th standard. On 13.01.2025 at 10 pm, the victim went to sleep in the room. At 12:00 am, when she looked at the room victim was not there. She had gone somewhere without informing anyone at the house. The victim was searched in the vicinity and doubted that any unknown person had kidnapped the victim. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant. As per the FSL report, human semen and stains were found. Based on this offence has been registered against the present applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submits that the victim was consenting party. He also submits that in the medical report of the victim no internal or external injury was found, the applicant is in jail since 14.01.2025 and out of total 22 witnesses, only 04 witnesses have been examined till date, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has supported the case of the prosecution and in FSL report human semen and stains were found. She also submits the applicant has committed a heinous offence with a minor girl aged about 15 years therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail.

6. The victim and her parents 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 material available on record.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and overall evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, and also looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected

9. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 14.01.2025 and and out of total 22 witnesses, only 04 witnesses have been examined till date, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded expeditiously within a period of 05 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

10. 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

Manpreet