1 2025:CGHC:2788 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 400 of 2025 Amit Dau S/o Shri Bhuneshwar Dau Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Naharpara Dindori, Chowki - Dindori, Thana - Chilpi, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Chowki - Chilpi, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manohar Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/01/2025 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. 140/2024 registered at Police Station Chilpi, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sections 376 (2) (n), 294, 323 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is a report has been lodged by the victim at Police Station Chilpi, District Mungeli (C.G.) alleging therein that the applicant/accused had physically exploited the complainant/victim on the pretext of marriage from April 2024 to October 2024, and had also subjected her to verbal abuse and physical assault, thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that victim is aged about 19 years, she was a consenting party, victim was in consensual relationship with the applicant for about one year. He also submits that with the consent of victim, they lived together as husband and wife at Raipur and Pune for four months, therefore, the commission of said offence has not been made out against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 02.11.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant had established physical relationship with victim from April 2024 to October 2024 on the pretext of marriage and also subjected her to verbal abuse & physical assault, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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, period of detention of the applicant since 02.11.2024, the fact that victim is aged about 19 years and she was a consenting party, she had been in consensual relationship with the applicant for about one year and when their relationship could not be materialized, she lodged the present FIR against the applicant with the intention to harass him, also considering the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant-Amit Dau, involved in Crime No. 140/2024 registered at Police Station Chilpi, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (2) (n), 294, 323 of 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 4 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 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil