Shailesh Bansod Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Heard on the application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Surksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 28/09/2024 in connection with Crime No. 66/2023 registered at P.S. Gatapar, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (CG) for the offence under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(j)(n) of IPC and Section 5 (j)(ii)(l)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short POCSO Act) against the applicant.

¶16

Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:2025.05.07 10:45:14 +0530

¶17

2

¶18

Pursuant to the order dated 03.04.2025, the victim along with her father appeared through virtual mode from DLSA- Rajnandgaon and raised objection in granting bail to the applicant. Their objection is taken on record.

¶19

The case of the prosecution is that on 28.11.2023, the father of the victim lodged a missing report that his minor daughter is missing 25.11.2023 and her whereabout could not be traced out. The FIR has been registered for the offence under Section 363 of IPC and started investigation. During investigation, the victim was recovered on 27.09.2024 from the possession of the applicant at Raipur. After recording her statement, the other offences under Section 366-A, 376 (2)(j) and (n) of IPC and Section 5 (j)(ii)(l)/6 of POCSO Act have been added. The applicant is arrested on 28.09.2024 and charge sheet has been filed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim is a major girl, having love affair with the applicant and she on her own will had gone with the applicant and engaged in making consensual physical relation with the applicant. Both of them have got married and the victim was resided in the house of the applicant on her own will. She has not raised any complaint to anyone in between that period and it is only that her father has lodged the missing report, the Police has recovered her. The applicant is in jail since 28.09.2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore the applicant may be released on bail.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that from the material collected during the investigation, the age of the victim comes to about 16 years and 4 months, she being the minor girl, was influenced by the applicant by forced drinking of tea having intoxicated substance in it by which she lost her consciousness and in that condition she

¶22

3

¶23

was subjected to rape by the applicant. He would further submit that the manner in which she was subjected to rape by the applicant, he is not entitled for bail.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶25

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and material collected during the investigation, further considering the age of the victim and the manner in which she was subjected to rape by the applicant and also in view of her 183 B.N.S.S. statement, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶26

Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Surksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail is hereby

¶27

rejected .

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶30

Sagrika

Shailesh Bansod v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Bansod v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Kewat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anupam Jha @ Amar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mithun Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sandip Fogla Vs Directorate of Enforcemet

Santosh Ram @ Guddu @ Chutiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pankaj Rajwade Vs State of Chhattisgarh