1 CGHC010259802026 2026:CGHC:40428 NAFRDigitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.09.17 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 11:58:49 +0530 MCRC No. 6195 of 2026 * - Narayan Verma S/o Shri Yadu Ram Verma Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bharda Khurd, Police Station Thelkadih, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 16/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as he is in jail since 31.12.2025 in connection with Crime No. 166/2025 registered in Police Station – Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) and 65(1) of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per prosecution story, the present applicant abducted the prosecutrix/victim, who is minor, from her lawful guardianship and took her to different places on the pretext of marriage and committed sexual intercourse with victim repeatedly. Hence, on report being lodged to the 2 above effect, the aforesaid offences have been registered against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He would further submit that the victim has already been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of prosecution. He would contend that she has denied suggestion putforth by the Public Prosecutor. He would further submit that the mother, father and brother of the victim have already been examined, but they have also not supported the case of prosecution. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 31.12.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the bail application. He would submit that at the time of incident, age of the victim/prosecutrix was 15 years and 04 months and there is serious allegations against the present applicant, therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Though there are allegations with regard to sexual assault against the present applicant, but the victim, her mother, father and brother have been examined before the learned trial Court and they have not supported the case of prosecution. Furthermore they have denied suggestions putforth by the Public Prosecutor. The applicant is in jail since 31.12.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some 3 time, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- I. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; III. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, IV. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future.

8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti

1 CGHC010259802026 2026:CGHC:40428 NAFRDigitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.09.17 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 11:58:49 +0530 MCRC No. 6195 of 2026 * - Narayan Verma S/o Shri Yadu Ram Verma Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bharda Khurd, Police Station Thelkadih, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 16/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as he is in jail since 31.12.2025 in connection with Crime No. 166/2025 registered in Police Station – Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) and 65(1) of BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. As per prosecution story, the present applicant abducted the prosecutrix/victim, who is minor, from her lawful guardianship and took her to different places on the pretext of marriage and committed sexual intercourse with victim repeatedly. Hence, on report being lodged to the 2 above effect, the aforesaid offences have been registered against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He would further submit that the victim has already been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of prosecution. He would contend that she has denied suggestion putforth by the Public Prosecutor. He would further submit that the mother, father and brother of the victim have already been examined, but they have also not supported the case of prosecution. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 31.12.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the bail application. He would submit that at the time of incident, age of the victim/prosecutrix was 15 years and 04 months and there is serious allegations against the present applicant, therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Though there are allegations with regard to sexual assault against the present applicant, but the victim, her mother, father and brother have been examined before the learned trial Court and they have not supported the case of prosecution. Furthermore they have denied suggestions putforth by the Public Prosecutor. The applicant is in jail since 31.12.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some 3 time, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- I. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; III. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, IV. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future.

8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti