1 2025:CGHC:15466 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2558 of 2025 Navratan Agrawal S/o Shri Radheshyam Agrawal Aged About 62 Years R/o Khamtarai, Bhanpuri 02, Police Station - Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer - Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.04.2025 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. 240/2025 registered at Police Station : Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the prosecution's story, in brief, the victim filed a written complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police, Raipur on 03.03.2025. She stated that she met Navratan Agrawal in January ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.03 17:10:09 +0530 2 2024 through a phone call. At the time, she was visiting her relative Dehuti Nagesh's house in Dhaneli, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Dehuti called Navratan Agrawal using her phone, and he saved the victim's number. He then repeatedly called her, asking to meet. After returning home to Bilaspur, Navratan Agrawal continued calling her. During their conversations, he expressed his liking for her and inquired about her work. She informed him that she worked as a house cleaner and was a widow with two daughters in her care. Navratan Agrawal told her that his wife had passed away due to cancer and that he was alone. He asked her to visit Raipur frequently, promising to provide her with household essentials and arrange a rented house for her. However, she refused. After his persistent requests, she eventually met him in Raipur. He picked her up from Raipur Railway Station on his Activa scooter and took her to Hotel Sher-e-Punjab, where he bought her food and gave her Rs. 2000/-, saying he would meet her again in the evening. He picked her up at 6:00 PM and took her shopping for clothes and other items. Afterwards, he took her to his factory in Bhanpuri. Inside the ofÏce, he forced her into physical relations against her will. He then dropped her back at the railway station and left. On subsequent visits to Raipur at his request, he took her to his house in Samta Colony and forced himself on her against her will. He also coerced her into unnatural sexual acts multiple times. When she refused, he told her she had to comply with everything. In March 2024, Navratan Agrawal claimed he was unwell and asked her to come to Raipur. She stayed at his house in Samta Colony, Raipur, for 15 days, during which he repeatedly forced himself on her. He pressured her to leave Bilaspur and permanently reside in Raipur, but she refused, 3 stating she could not abandon her two daughters. Gradually, he reduced communication with her. Later, she informed from a relative that Navratan Agrawal had filed a complaint against her, alleging she had extorted Rs. 29,50,000/- from him through threats. She denied taking any money from him or being involved in any such act of fraud. Based on the victim's written complaint, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered against the accused at Khamtarai Police Station, District-Raipur, bearing Crime No. 240/2025, under Section 376 (2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was subsequently arrested on 04.03.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant was arrested based on an old, false complaint filed by the victim. However, the truth is that the applicant/accused had himself lodged a complaint against the fraud and deceit committed against him. Nevertheless, instead of taking action on his complaint, the Khamtarai Police, Raipur, falsely implicated him based on the victim's previous false complaint, without properly examining the facts. He further submits that the applicant is aged about 62 years and has been in jail since 04.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She also submits that the applicant has committed forcefully sexual 4 intercourse with the victim against her will, 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 circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that though the allegation is against the applicant that he committed sexual intercourse with the victim, but the same does not corroborate from the MLC and FSL reports of the victim, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 04.03.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Navratan Agrawal, involved in Crime No. 240/2025 registered at Police Station : Khamtarai, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 5 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 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 forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek