1 2025:CGHC:21672 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 701 of 2025 1 - Devashish Karak S/o Sachin Nandan Karak Aged About 34 Years R/o General Manager, Lovely Palace, Supela, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Chawni (Wrongly Mentioned As Chhawani (Bhilai) In The Impugned Order), District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For State : Ms. Shobha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/05/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.158/2025 registered at Police Station – Chawni, District-Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 64(1), 69 of the BNS. 2. As per Case of the prosecution the complainant lodged a report at Police Station Bhatapara stating that while searching for a job, she came into contact with the applicant in Raipur. The applicant subsequently expressed his love for her and assured VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.05.14 11:48:15 +0530 2 her that he would marry her. Replying on this assurance, the complainant entered into a physical relationship with him. However, when she later asked the applicant to marry her, he refused, revealing that he was already married and, therefore, could not marry her. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the present applicant having no involvement in the aforesaid crime. The complainant was the consenting party and there was no inducement or false promise of marriage made with dishonest intention. The FIR appears to have been lodged with a malicious intent to extort money from the applicant. Therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, gravity of offence, specially the complainant, who while searching for a job, came into the contact of the applicant in Raipur. The applicant subsequently expressed his love for her and assured her that he would marry her. Replying on this assurance, the complainant entered into a physical relationship with him. However, when she later asked the applicant to marry her, he 3 refused, revealing that he was already married and, therefore, could not marry her, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant– Devashish Karak, filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No.158/2025 registered at Police Station – Chawni, District-Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 64(1), 69 of the BNS is rejected. sd/-Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali