1 2025:CGHC:17661 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 536 of 2025 Surendra Bariha S/o Shri Ravi Lal Bariha Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Kishanpur, Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For applicant : Shri Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 17/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.238/2024, GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.04.21 13:18:29 +0530 2 registered at Police Station Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 366, 376(2) (n) of the IPC & Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act. 3. As per the case of the prosecution, the prosecutrix has lodged the report at Police Station Pithora, against the applicant with the allegation, that under the pretext of marriage, the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix in the year 2022. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that the allegation whatsoever recorded in F.I.R. in registering the offence against the applicant cannot constitute the ingredients of the offence. He would submit that the applicant is a reputed person of his locality and if the applicant is arrested in the false case, then it would cause irreparable loss and his reputation will be ruined and the applicant will lose his hope of life and the applicant has not committed any offence. Hence he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. She would submit that charge sheet has already been filed as absconder and incident is of 25/10/2022, therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the nature of allegation made against the present applicant that the applicant on the pretext of marriage, has committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix in the year 2022, 3 also considering the fact that the applicant has been absconding and has now come up before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail and the charge-sheet has already been filed as absconder in the present case before the competent Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. The Supreme Court, in Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in {(2012) 8 SCC 730} and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma, reported in {(2014) 2 SCC 171}, has observed that where the accused has been declared as an absconder and has not cooperated with the investigation, he should not be granted anticipatory bail. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Surendra Bariha, filed under Section 482 of BNSS involved in Crime No.238/2024, registered at Police Station Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of the IPC & Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act, is rejected. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri