1 2025:CGHC:2489 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 383 of 2025 Durgesh Sahu S/o Sundarlal Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o- Near Sundrapani Tanki, P.S. Police Station Chowki Chikhali, Tahsil And District – Rajnandgaon ( C.G. ) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Police Chowki – Chikhali, District – Rajnandgaon ( C.G. ). ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.01.2025 1. 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. 633/2024, registered at Police Chowki – Chikhali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that victim has appeared before RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Police Station concerned and filed a complaint against applicant that she was working as cook in C.G. Dental College Sundara's mess and while working there she met applicant who was also working there as Driver, thereafter they started talking to each other, complainant has alleged that accused has established physical relationship with her on the pretext of promise to marry her in future from 15.11.2019 to 16.03.2023 and meanwhile persuaded her in taking medicine to abort the pregnancy, on 23.02.2023, complainant again become pregnant, applicant brought her medicine for abortion but complainant denied and asked applicant to marry her, when applicant refused to marry her the complainant filed a complaint against him. Hence, this application. 3. 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 a major divorcee lady aged about 32 years and there was a love affair between the applicant and the victim since the year 2019, and thereafter, a sexual relationship was established between both of them, but the relationship could not be materialized, hence, she filed the FIR and she is the consenting party. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 30.09.2024 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 3 application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. It is further submitted that that accused has established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of promise to marry her in future from 15.11.2019 to 16.03.2023 and meanwhile persuaded her in taking medicine to abort the pregnancy, on 23.02.2023, complainant again become pregnant, applicant brought her medicine for abortion but complainant denied and asked applicant to marry her, when applicant refused to marry her the complainant filed a complaint against him. It is further submitted that she had delivered a child and the DNA report is still awaited. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant and period of detention in jail, from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it transpires that the victim is a major divorcee lady aged about 32 years and there was a love affair between the applicant and the victim since the year 2019, and thereafter, a sexual relationship was established between both of them, but the relationship could not be materialized, hence, she filed the FIR and she is the consenting party, further she had delivered a child and the DNA report is still awaited, also the fact 4 that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 30.09.2024 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 on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let applicant – Durgesh Sahu involved in Crime No. 633/2024, registered at Police Chowki – Chikhali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC, 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, 5 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 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. 8. 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 Rajshekhar