1 2025:CGHC:22152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3933 of 2025 1 - Pramendra Yadu S/o Shri Santosh Yadu Aged About 26 Years R/o Vill.-Singarpur, Tah.Bhatapara, P.S.Bhatapara (Rural),dist- Balodabazar-Bhatapara(C.G.) (The Name of The Applicant Wrongly Mentioned In Impugned Order As Pramendr Yadu) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through-S.H.O. P.S. Bhatapara (Rural), Dist.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20/05/2025 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. 125/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara (Rural), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 296, 115(2), 351(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.02.2025 the SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2025.05.21 11:12:25 +0530 2 victim lodged the complaint stating that she was in relationship with the applicant since last 08 years in between the applicant has developed physical relationship with her, that when she requested him to marry with her then on 17.02.2025 the applicant has performed marriage with her as per Hindu Ritual and custom in the Temple situated at Vill-Tarenga, Dist-Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, that the victim made request to him for registration of marriage then he assured her that he will get the marriage registered on 28.02.2025 but he failed to do so. It is further alleged that when the victim again requested him for registration of marriage the applicant used the filthy language against her and threatened to kill her, therefore the victim has lodged the complaint against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submitted that the applicant and victim both are major and there is love affair between them, they have also performed the marriage in the temple only because the applicant has denied to register the marriage on family pressure victim lodged the present FIR against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 23.04.2025. The charge-sheet has been filed and no further investigation is required, however, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time 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 3 according to charge-sheet applicant has no previous criminal antecedents but looking to the overtact application may be reject. 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, the fact that the applicant and victim both are major and there is love affair between them and they were in relationship since 8 years thereafter they have also performed the marriage in the temple only because the applicant has denied to register the marriage, present FIR has been lodged against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 23.04.2025. this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Pramendra Yadu, involved in Crime No. 125/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara (Rural), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 296, 115(2), 351(2) of of BNS, 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 4 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 sufficient 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 sufficient 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law within a period of six months , if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) vaishali Chief Justice