1 2025:CGHC:14812 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2451 of 2025 Rana Praveen Gajbhiye S/o Om Prakash Gajbhiye Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Shanti Nagar, Rajnandgaon, Tehsil And District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.03.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 19/2025 registered at Police Station O.P. Sukuldaihan, Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 506(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a report was lodged by the victim, a 41-year-old resident of village Pasoud, District Balod RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 (C.G.). The victim, along with her friend Yogita Sahu, works at Vihan Group (R.B.K.), where she came into contact with the present applicant. It has been alleged in the complaint that on several occasions, the applicant pressured the victim to meet him, and on 30.04.2021, he forcibly took her in his car towards the Singapore factory and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. It is further alleged that the applicant threatened the victim and extorted Rs. 92,000/- from her. The complaint also states that on 26.05.2024, the applicant again committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Based on this report, the police registered an offence and commenced the investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to a dispute regarding the payment of Rs.92,000/- between the applicant and the victim. The applicant had lent the said amount to the victim. It is further submitted that both parties entered into an agreement concerning the repayment of the disputed amount on 05.01.2025. A copy of the said agreement is annexed herewith as Annexure A/2. He further submits that there is a huge delay in lodging the FIR , because as per the allegation the first incident took place on 30.04.2021 and the last incident took place on 26.05.2024, which clearly shows that the allegations are false and fabricated. He also submits that the medical report does not support the case of the prosecution as no sign of injury is found on the body of the victim and no definite opinion of forceful sexual intercourse has been given. He further submits that the present applicant has no previous 3 criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 19.01.2025. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the victim, along with her friend Yogita Sahu, works at Vihan Group (R.B.K.), where she came into contact with the present applicant and the applicant pressured the victim to meet him, and on 30.04.2021, he forcibly took her in his car towards the Singapore factory and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. She further submits that the applicant threatened the victim and extorted Rs. 92,000/- from her and thereafter, on 26.05.2024, the applicant again committed forcible sexual intercourse with her, therefore, the 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 and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 19.01.2025, the fact that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to a financial dispute involving Rs.92,000/- which was acknowledged and settled through an agreement dated 05.01.2025 (Annexure A/2), the significant delay in lodging the FIR, with the first alleged incident occurring on 30.04.2021 and the last on 26.05.2024, raises doubts about the authenticity of the allegations, moreover, the medical report does not support the prosecution’s case, as no signs of injury were found on the victim’s 4 body, nor was there any conclusive opinion of forcible sexual intercourse, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Rana Praveen Gajbhiye, involved in Crime No. 19/2025 registered at Police Station O.P. Sukuldaihan, Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 506(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, be released on bail on their 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 5 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan