1 2025:CGHC:11208 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1862 of 2025 Vikash Rohra S/o Ramesh Rohra Aged About 37 Years R/o Royal Archid, 27 Kholi, Ps Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Civil Line Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Ms. Priyanka Shukla, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.21/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74 of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the accused who is a journalist has posted some story on WhatsApp group relating to spiritual leader wherein husband of the complainant was also involved KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 therefore, the complainant visited him in relation to the same. It is alleged that the accused caught her hand and touched her while hurling abuses on her character therefore complainant shouted to call her husband and the applicant ran away. After completion of investigation, the Police has filed charge-sheet despite submission of CCTV footage and camera recording being provided by the applicant clearly shows the malice and high handedness of the Complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that against the malicious action of the Complainant, the applicant had already filed a complaint with the Superintendent of Police and had provided copy of video evidence to them as well however, till date no action has been taken. He further submits that that the present case is merely an afterthought as there is delay of almost 24 hours in registration of the present offence which is not explained by the prosecution. The other offence registered against the applicant are also false and malicious prosecution initiated by persons on whom the applicant had ran stories and the applicant has provided CCTV footage and camera recording of the time and place of incidence clearly indicating that the applicant was taking gracefully with the complainant consciously keeping a distance while the complainant was misbehaving with him. However, the Police has paid no heed to the same and because the applicant is a journalist and has posted irregularities in relation to one local spiritual leader owing to which the complainant visited applicant and 3 threatened him to remove the content and to not to follow up. The whole prosecution case is a made up story and the applicant's intention to outrage the modesty of the complainant is absent therefore no offence as alleged is made out and the applicant is in jail since 12.01.2025 and the applicant has three criminal antecedent under the IPC of the year 2017 to 2024 which has been explained in the bail application and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State appearing for the non-applicant/State as well as learned counsel for the objector opposes the bail application of the applicant and submit that the accused/applicant made derogatory remarks about the victim's character, with ill intentions, grabbed her arm, pulling her towards him and touched her body. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence levelled against the applicant and further considering the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNS, it appears that the victim is a major girl aged about 25 years and further the applicant is a journalist and has posted irregularities in relation to one local spiritual leader owing to which the complainant visited applicant and threatened him to remove the content and to not to follow up and the applicant is in jail since 4 12.01.2025, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, he has three criminal antecedent under the IPC which has been explained in the bail application, thus without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant -Vikas Rohra, involved in Crime No.21/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74 of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (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. (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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such 5 proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 sufÏcient 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal