Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Suraj Das vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 14 July, 2025

                                             1


                                        Digitally
                                        signed by A
                              A         ANNAJEE
                                        RAO
                              ANNAJEE   Date:
                              RAO       2025.07.16
                                        10:58:46
                                        +0530




                                                      2025:CGHC:32804



        HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                         MCRC No. 4718 of 2025



Suraj Das S/o Vinod Das Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Sakholi
Mahadevpara, P.S. Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh....
                                                              Applicant

                                    versus

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Ambikapur, District
Surguja, Chhattisgarh.                                  ... Respondent

For the applicant : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer (Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 14.07.2025

1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No. 206/2025 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m) & 87 of the BNS and Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.

2. The prosecution case is that applicant is accused of kidnapping the minor girl and forcing her to have illicit sex and raping her more than once on the pretext of marriage, due to this, the victim got frustrated and tried to commit suicide by consuming 8-10 paracetamol tablets.

2

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no offence as projected by the prosecution has been committed by the applicant and no ingredients of section 64(2)(m) & 87 of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act are attracted in this case. It is also submitted that the victim, her father and mother have been examined and they have become hostile to the prosecution. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.04.2025 and till date out of 16 witnesses, only the above 3 have been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of the case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the girl was minor at the time of incident and the applicant had committed forcible sexual intercourse, on the pretext of marriage.

5. The victim girl along with her father has appeared through VC and recorded no-objection to bail.

6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without observing anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Cc as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao