1 2025:CGHC:20264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2295 of 2025 Mannuram Netam S/o Mahangu Ram Netam Aged About 25 Years R/o Bhiragaon, Schoolpara, Police Station Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.05.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 38/2025 registered at Police Station : Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2) (n) of Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the prosecution's story, in brief, is that the applicant and the victim became acquainted with each other five years ago, as both RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 were working as laborers. They developed a liking for each other and used to communicate over mobile phone. It is alleged that in the month of May 2023, the victim went to the applicant’s house, and under the pretext of marriage, he established physical relations with her, due to which the victim became nine months pregnant. The applicant kept delaying the marriage on some pretext. Hence, the FIR was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant and victim are major persons and used to work together as laborers. Both of them established physical relationship with free consent. He further submits that the FIR was lodged after 05 years. He further submits that the applicant always had the intention to marry the victim, but due to lack of funds, he could not solemnize the marriage. He had accompanied the victim to the hospital for the delivery of the child, and the child has since been delivered. The FIR was lodged by the victim in haste, arising out of a trivial dispute between the couple. The applicant is still willing to marry the victim. Moreover, the dispute between them has been resolved, and therefore, the victim did not raise any objection to the grant of bail before the trial court. He also submits that the present applicant is in jail since 22.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- 3 sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that the present applicant/accused established physical relations with the victim under the pretext of marriage, due to which the victim became nine months pregnant. The applicant kept delaying the marriage on some pretext, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and from the perusal of statement of victim recorded, it appears that the victim who is a major girl having a consensual relationship with the applicant and she was a consenting party and further the applicant always had the intention to marry the victim, but due to lack of funds, he could not solemnize the marriage, he had accompanied the victim to the hospital for the delivery of the child, and the child has since been delivered and the applicant is still willing to marry the victim and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant is in jail since 22.02.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Mannuram Netam, involved in Crime No. 38/2025 registered at Police Station : Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing a 4 personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 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 5 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 certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan