Chattisgarh High Court
Kanha Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 June, 2025
1
Digitally signed by
SHUBHAM SINGH
RAGHUVANSHI
Date: 2025.06.12
15:13:31 +0530
2025:CGHC:23152
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2950 of 2025
Kanha Sahu S/o Rajesh Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Nayapara, Police
Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Of Police Station Sirgitti, District
Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Rupendra Kumar Dewangan, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order On Board
11/06/2025
1. The victim along with her father appeared before this Court today and
recorded her no objection in granting bail to the applicant.
2. The applicant has preferred this 1st 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. 290/2024, registered at
Police Station – Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable
under Sections 363, 366, 323, 294 and 376 (2)(n) of the IPC and
Section 3/4 (2) and Section 5 (ठ)/6 of the POCSO Act.
3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 07.04.2024, the applicant
allegedly abducted the minor victim without the consent of her lawful
2
guardian, for the purpose of committing sexual intercourse. It is further
alleged that he repeatedly committed rape with the victim and upon the
victim’s refusal, the applicant abused her verbally and physically
assaulted her. Based on above, offence has been registered against
the applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further
submits that the victim was a consenting party as there was a love
affair between the applicant and the victim. The victim herself joined
the company of the applicant and stayed with him. Further, the
applicant is in jail since 12.09.2024 and the trial is likely to some time to
be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged
on bail.
5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes
the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed.
Out of 18 witnesses, some witnesses have been examined and some
remain to be examined. Hence, looking to the nature of offence, the
applicant may not be released on bail.
6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the material available on record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence
collected by the prosecution against the applicant and further
considering that some important witnesses are remain to be examined,
at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am
not inclined to release the applicant on bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. However, the Trial Court
is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded
as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
Shubham