1 2025:CGHC:25943 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 878 of 2025 Vikas Sahu S/o Gopal Prasad Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Salkhan P.S. Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- District Magistrate Janjgir Champa Through Police Station- Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Smt. Subha Shrivastava, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 19/06/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.171/2025, registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan (P.S. Janjgir wrongly mention in impugned order) District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(N) of IPC. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.06.21 12:42:20 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix has lodged the report at police station Shivrinarayan against the applicant stating that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her on pretext of marriage. After refusal of marriage by the applicant, the prosecutrix lodged F.I.R. on 15/05/2025 against the applicant. 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 applicant is a married person and the prosecutrix is also married lady and were known to each other because both they were resident of same village. He would submit that the husband of the prosecutrix has thrown her out of his house, therefore she use to demand money for her personal work and the applicant has helped several times but she did not returned money to the applicant and she demanded huge money i.e. Rs.10,000/- from applicant but due to some difficulty he refused to pay the amount, therefore she lodged the report against the applicant. He would submit that the prosecutrix is a married lady and the applicant has not promised the prosecutrix for marrying her and both are consenting party. He would submit that the applicant is permanent resident as mentioned in the cause title and there is no chance of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case, therefore he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 3 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 and circumstances of the case, also considering the fact that the applicant is already a married person and he on the pretext of marriage established physical relationship with the victim and when it was found that the applicant is a married person, the relationship between them became strained and the present FIR has been lodged, therefore considering the conduct of the applicant, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Vikas Sahu, involved in Crime No.171/2025, registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan (P.S. Janjgir wrongly mention in impugned order) District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(N) of IPC is rejected. Sd/-Sd S S S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri