1 2025:CGHC:14955 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1946 of 2025 Raju @ Rajeev Sahu S/o Late Dhanush Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Kandul Bhatapara, PS Mujgahan, Distt.- Raipur, (C.G.) --Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mujgahan, Distt.- Raipur, (C.G.) --- Respondent MCRC No. 2030 of 2025 Premlal Sahu S/o Shiv Prashad Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Village - Kandul, Ps Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mujgahan, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent And GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.03.28 19:26:38 +0530 2 MCRC No. 2035 of 2025 Dhaneshwar Nishad S/o Bodhi Ram Nishad Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Kandul, PS. Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent For applicants : Shri Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Amit Verma, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27/03/2025 1. In compliance of the order dated 12/03/2025 covering memo has been filed along with the afÏdavit of the complainant and the original afÏdavit has also been produced by learned counsel for the applicant which is taken on record. 2. All the three bail applications are decided by this common order as they are arising out of the same crime number. 3. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 277/2024, registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District- Raipur 3 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1), 115, 127(1) of B.N.S. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.11.2024 a written complaint was made by Anisha Quraishi, alleging therein that on 25.11.2024 at about 05:00PM when she was returning to her home on her scooty, co-accused Prem Lal Sahu called her and asked her to meet near Ravi Auto center, when she reached to the auto center she met with applicant who was accompanied by other two co-accused persons namely, Premlal Sahu and Radhe Nishad who were sitting in the e- rikisha and request her to come along as there is an emergency a patient needed medical care, of which she agreed and went along, thereafter she was taken to an known isolated place where she was subjected to sexual assault by all three persons. Hence the FIR. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that notary afÏdavit dated 22/03/2025 of the victim who is a married lady has been annexed with the covering memo wherein she has stated that she has received Rs.2 lakhs (Rs. Two Lakhs) from the parents of the applicants as there were some transaction between her and applicants and it is further stated that she has no dispute with the applicants, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail applications. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, also considering the fact that original afÏdavit dated 22/03/2025 of the victim 4 who is a married lady has been placed on record wherein she has stated that she has received Rs.2 lakhs (Rs.Two Lakhs) from the parent of the applicants and it is stated that she has no dispute with the applicants, therefore, I am inclined to allow these applications. 9. Let applicant, Raju @ Rajeev Sahu in MCRC No. 1946 of 2025, applicant Premlal Sahu in MCRC No. 2030 of 2025 and applicant Dhaneshwar Nishad in MCRC No. 2035 of 2025, involved in Crime No. 277/2024, registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1), 115, 127(1) of B.N.S. be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, 5 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 10. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri