Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11420 (CHH)

NITESH KUMAR GENDRE v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/306/2025 · 2025-03-10

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:11880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 306 of 2025 Nitesh Kumar Gendre S/o Sanjay Gendre Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Near Chaturvedi Grocery Store, Purani Basti, Kohka, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Jamul, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri T.K. Jha, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Malay Jain, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/03/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.03.11 18:53:57 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.84/2025 registered at Police Station Jamul, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64 (1), 83, 351 (2) of B.N.S. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that, the present applicant and complainant were known to each other for last 4-5 months and at the time when he went to her house, present applicant committed sexual intercourse in his car on pretext of marriage and on 16.12.2024 the applicant did marriage with complainant at temple. When the complainant came to know about the fact that the present applicant was already married, she lodged complaint before the police. On the basis of written complaint FIR was registered against the present applicant, hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the case. He would submit that the complainant is a major lady aged about 24 years and she was a consenting party, hence he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and he would submit that there are three criminal antecedents against the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that the complainant is a major lady and consenting party, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant - Nitesh Kumar Gendre, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) He shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri