1 2025:CGHC:35816 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 929 of 2025 Anil Verma S/o Jagmohan Prasad Verma Aged About 42 Years R/o Happy Homes, Near Kukreja Form House, Mahavir Nagar, P.S. - New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. - Gudiyari, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Dembra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 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. 288/2025 registered at Police Station – Gudhiyari, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 376(2)(घ), 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 6, 10 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 2. According to the prosecution, the complainant lodged a written report dated 02.06.2025, alleging that on 13.02.2024, when she went to give 2 money to one Dhanesh at his clinic, Dhanesh’s colleague, Daniel, informed her that Dhanesh was sitting behind the clinic. It is further alleged that when she went to the back of the clinic, Daniel and the present applicant came there and committed sexual intercourse with her, and thereafter, the main accused, Daniel, threatened her, due to which she lodged the instant report. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that even if the entire prosecution case is accepted, no criminal offence is made out, as the present applicant never went to the clinic of Dhanesh, and the applicant is being falsely implicated because he had lodged a report against several persons, including one advocate, namely Mohd. Sultan Ahmed. As the police failed to complete the investigation, the applicant filed W.P.(Cr.) before this Hon’ble Court, in which this Court directed for the completion of the investigation. A copy of the order is filed herewith as Annexure A/2. He also submits that the report against the said Mohd. Sultan Ahmed is annexed herewith as Annexure A/3, which shows that there is enmity between the applicant and Mohd. Sultan Ahmed. The victim is related as a sister to one Nitin Dahariya, against whom the wife of Daniel had lodged a report in Crime No. 25/2024 at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, and vide judgment dated 29.05.2025, the said accused was acquitted. A copy of the judgment is filed herewith as Annexure A/4. He also submits that since, Dhanesh is the counsel of the present applicant and Daniel is a colleague of Dhanesh, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that initially, the police registered the FIR under Sections 294, 506, 376(2)(घ), and 376(1) of the I.P.C. A copy of the FIR is filed herewith as Annexure A/5. It is further submitted that the said Mohd. Sultan Ahmed 3 had threatened the applicant’s wife, Anjali, regarding the withdrawal of the FIR registered at Police Station Khamtarai bearing Crime No. 906/2024, stating that otherwise he would implicate her husband in a false case, and consequently, the instant case has been registered against the applicant. A copy of the affidavit is filed herewith as Annexure A/6. He also submits that the applicant used to meet his counsel, Dhanesh, at the Raipur Court, and as he had made a complaint against the said advocate as stated above, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, therefore, he prays he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non- applicant/State, opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that applicant along with other co-accused person, have committed forceful sexual intercourse with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in the present case. 5. In compliance of this Court’s order dated 27.06.2025, the victim/objector on 17.07.2025 appeared through video conferencing from DLSA Raipur and raised strong objection for the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that in compliance of this Court’s order dated 17.07.2025, the learned counsel for the applicant filed an additional affidavit with regard to the present case, which is annexed with the present anticipatory bail application, from perusal of the affidavit as well as the case diary it transpires, that initially the wife of the co-accused, namely Deniyal Tandi, had lodged an FIR against the brother of the victim for the offences 4 punishable under Sections 363, 366, 506 Part II, 375(2)(n), and 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(n) and 6 of the POCSO Act, in which the brother of the victim was acquitted vide judgment dated 29.05.2025. Three days thereafter, the complainant lodged an FIR against Deniyal Tandi and the present applicant, alleging that the applicant used to help Deniyal Tandi in the litigation filed by Deniyal Tandi's wife. Hence, due to previous enmity, the complainant has lodged a false report against the applicant along with the other co-accused, namely Deniyal Tandi, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Anil Verma, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/ sd/-Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Alfiza