1 / 3 2025:CGHC:35645 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 972 of 2025 Vikas Yadav S/o Tikam Yadav, Aged About 21 Years R/o Nagarpanch Bagicha Ward No. 10, Tahsil- Bagicha, District-Jashpur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Bagicha, District-Jashpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 23.07.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.76/2025, registered at Police Station – Bagicha District – Jashpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366,366-A 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 and 6 & 17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act 2012. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 06.11.2020 the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix and thereafter the VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.07.24 19:05:09 +0530 2 / 3 applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her on several time. The report to the above effect has been lodged by the prosecutrix, upon which, the aforesaid alleged offences have been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, according to the prosecution the first incident took place on 06.11.2020 and on that day, the applicant was minor, as the date of birth of applicant is 05.11.2003. A copy of school mark sheet of applicant is annexed herewith as Annexure-A/2. He further submits that the first information report has been lodged with inordinate and unexplained delay after about 5 years from the alleged incident and the applicant has not committed any sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix against her will and consent. therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled 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, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the material available in the case diary which prima facie indicates that the victim was in a relationship with the applicant for the last four years and their relationship was consensual. However, as per the victim's statement under Section 183 of the BNS, the applicant established physical relations with her under the false 3 / 3 pretext of marriage and due to which, she became pregnant and thereafter, the applicant refused to marry her. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case for the grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant –Vikas Yadav, involved in Crime No.76/2025, registered at Police Station – Bagicha District – Jashpur (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 363,366,366-A 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 and 6 & 17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act 2012, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav