1 2025:CGHC:4708 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 723 of 2025 Munna Yadav @ Raghunath Yadav S/o Birsingh Aged About 43 Years R/o Gram- Shivtarai, Tashil And Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur, C.G. ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aayush Lall, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/01/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 762/2024 registered at Police Station Kota, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 331(4), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.09.2024, a written complaint was lodged by the complainant before the concerned police station with the averment that on 14.09.2024, her husband KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.28 10:44:20 +0530 2 went to sell khova who did not return back on the night, on that night, applicant-Munna Yadav along with one other person came around 12 am in night and asked for glass and entered into the house of the complainant drank wine at around 12:30 am and thereafter, Munna Yadav committed rape with the complainant and other person was also removing his clothes to commit rape on her but she began to cry and said that she will die so he put on his clothes and both ran away. The complainant came to her matrimonial home in Gram- Newsa and told to her husband and family members about the said offence. Thereafter, the police ofÏcer registered the aforesaid offence and initiated the investigation. During course of investigation statement of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the entire investigation charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the complainant/victim is a married woman, aged about 30 years and knew the present applicant for the long time. The applicant works to drive cows and bulls and due to some disputes in this relation between complainant and present applicant he was falsely implicated in the present crime in question. He further submits that from the perusal of the prosecution story itself it is glaring that before lodging the FIR the complainant went to her matrimonial home and she was forced by her family members to lodge the report against the applicant and the present case cannot be fully relied upon as the report was lodged by the complainant due 3 to some personal grudge and there is no other connecting evidence and witness in the present case. He also submits that the medical report does not disclose any thing about commission of rape on the complainant and memorandum itself is not admissible, therefore, prosecution fails to prove prima facie case against the present applicant and he is in jail since 16.09.2024, he 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 from perusal of the case diary, it appears that when victim’s husband left to sell khova but failed to return that night. The next day, around 12:00 pm, applicant- Munna Yadav arrived with another person, inquiring about a buffalo and requesting a glass. Both individuals entered her home, consumed alcohol and thereafter, at approximately 12:30 pm, applicant- Munna Yadav forcibly raped her. When she screamed, he silenced her and the accompanying person began to undress. Upon hearing this, the applicant expressed her desperation, prompting the second person to re-dress and flee. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 4 16.09.2024, the fact that the the victim is a married woman aged about 30 years and she knew the present applicant for the long time and also considering the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS and moreover, the fact that the medical report also does not disclose anything about commission of rape on the complainant/victim and memorandum itself is not admissible and further no injuries were found on her, the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant-Munna Yadav @ Raghunath Yadav, involved in Crime No. 762/2024 registered at Police Station Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 331(4), 3(5) of BNS, 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. 5 (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 copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal