Upendra Kumar Bunkar Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Soni, along with Mr. Suraj Kumar Audheliya, Advocate. For State : Smt. Supriya Upasane, G.A. For Objector : Ms. Seema Singh, Advocate. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

02/01/2026

¶15

The accused/applicant has moved this Second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 742/2024 registered at police station Ambikapur, District Surguja, (CG) ) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(e), 55, 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the BNS Act, 2023 and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶16

2

¶17

Prosecution case in brief is that complainant lodged a report alleging that her daughter was residing with her brother and sisterin-law and pursuing her studies in Class 10th at Sunrise School, Ghutrapara, Ambikapur. It is alleged that on 25.10.2024 she went to school in the morning at about 8.00 am and thereafter she was found missing. On being suspicion that some unknown person had allured her minor daughter, crime under Section 137(2) of the BNS was registered. Search was conducted and on 17.11.2024, the victim was recovered and her memorandum statement was recorded in which she has stated that accused Mitthu Ram allured her on the pretext of marriage and seduced to illicit intercourse on several occasions. It is the allegation against the applicant that he along with the applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 9078/2024 had manipulated the date of birth of the victim as 02.10.2000 in place of 02.10.2010 and had also prepared notary and thus cooperated in preparing the duplicate date of birth certificate of the victim showing her to be major.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 04.02.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 8825/2024 and he submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime-in-question. He further He further submits that the applicant runs a Choice Centre and the victim came to his shop for correction in the date of birth in the Aadhar card and on the basis of valid document i.e., birth certificate, he had updated her Aadhar card and given the receipt thereof. It is further contended that the main accused is Mitthu Ram

¶19

3

¶20

Ravi who had prepared the forged and fabricated birth certificate by putting forged signature. Lastly, it is submitted that the present applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024 and looking to the conduct of the prosecution it is clear that the trial will take time for its conclusion and therefore the applicant be released on bail.

¶21

Per contra , learned counsel for the State, has opposed the bail application and submits that the applicant has committed a serious offence by manipulating a false and fabricated date of birth certificate mentioning the age of the victim to be 24 years by increasing 10 years and prepared the Aadhar card showing her to be major and therefore, he may not be released on bail.

¶22

Learned counsel for the objector appears before this Court and also in compliance of the order dated 09.12.2025, the victim appears before this Court through Video Conferencing from DLSA, Surguja (C.G.) and both of them have raised objection to not to release the applicant on bail.

¶23

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

¶24

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that in this case, the main accused is Mitthu Ram Ravi who had prepared the forged and fabricated birth certificate by putting forged signature. It is further clear that the present applicant is not the main accused in this case, however, he has no criminal antecedents, and is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more

¶25

4

¶26

time, therefore, looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, the role of the present applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶27

Let the Applicant– Upendra Kumar Bunkar, involved in Crime No. 742/2024 registered at Police of Police Station – Kotwali, Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under aforesaid sections be released on bail on his furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶28

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶29

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶30

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of

¶31

5

¶32

BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶33

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶34

However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶35

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶36

Sd/- s Sd/-

¶37

(Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE

¶38

U.K. Raju

Upendra Kumar Bunkar v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upendra Kumar Bunkar v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Parwati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Neelesh Bhargav @ Chhota Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Soni Ajay Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

K.K. Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Swati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Omprakash Vs State of Chhattisgarh