1 2025:CGHC:17636 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2559 of 2025 Suraj Chandravanshi S/o Santosh Chandravanshi Aged About 24 Years R/o Village - Bhareli, Police Station - Pandatarai, Tahsil - Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Mahila Thana Kawardha, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Subha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. T.H. Sahu, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this case have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 01/2025, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana Kawardha, District : Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Sections 64(2)(m), 87, 137(2) of the BNS, Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. The prosecution story, in brief is that the complainant/victim lodged a complaint before Police Station concerned on 17.01.2025 alleging inter-alia that the present applicant is resident of her native village and she came into contact with him in the year 2022-23 when she was studying in Class-11 and the present applicant proposed her that he loves her but due to study she refused the proposal of the present applicant, the present applicant put his proposal again and again before the victim then she was threatened by stopping the study and also threatened to cause death then the victim went to her village at Sambalpur, Bemetara for continuing her study, the applicant came there also then looking to the love and passion of the applicant, the victim accepted the proposal then the present applicant started insisting for meeting with the girl and on the date of farewell of the school dated 16.02.2024 the victim girl was taken by motorcycle by the present applicant to a rental house of his friend namely Alok Chandravanshi and despite refusal of the girl, made physical relationship with her on pretext of marriage. The present applicant trapped her into love trap and kept having physical relationship with the complainant under pretext of marriage, despite knowing the fact that the girl is less than 18 years of age, the present applicant took her to Singh Hotel, Mungeli two times where he made physical relationship with her and lastly the applicant made physical relationship with victim on 22.07.2024. The victim went to Raipur where the applicant was residing then he told 3 her to return back and wait for him till getting the age of majority and he further asked for some time to put the matter before his family members then the victim waited for one month and when she failed to get conversation through mobile phone then she visited to the house of the applicant, but the applicant was not present and his family members did not get any conversation with the victim and only advised her to return back by giving assurance after getting the age of 18 years, she will be married with the applicant. The applicant stopped conversation with the victim girl and she became major on 24.12.2024 but thereafter also when she asked for the marriage with the present applicant, he refused to marry with her. The applicant knowing the fact that victim is minor, committed physical relationship on pretext of marriage at Kawardha, Mungeli, Raipur. Hence, this application. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the victim is aged about 18 years old girl and there was some love affair between the applicant and the victim for 8-9 months, and thereafter, a consensual sexual relationship was established between both of them, but the relationship could not be materialized, hence, she lodged the FIR with malicious intension and she is a consenting party. He further submits that the charge- sheet has been filed in this case and the applicant is in jail since 13.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 4 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. It is further submitted that as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it transpires that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse many times at many places with the victim on the pretext of marriage and thereafter, the applicant stopped every kind of conversation with the victim. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant endorse the submission advanced by the learned State counsel and submits that the victim has appeared through District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and has vehemently objected the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and further submits that the applicant has threatened to make her video and photos viral. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, further the fact that the victim is currently aged about 18 years, victim and applicant were acquainted to each other since 2022-2023 and they were in consensual relationship and when their relationship could not be materialized, she lodged present FIR and against the applicant to harass him, further in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 13.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released 5 on bail in this case. 9. Let applicant - Suraj Chandravanshi involved in Crime No. 01/2025, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana Kawardha, District : Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 87, 137(2) of the BNS, Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, be released on bail on his 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 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 6 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. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 11. 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 Kunal