Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33224 (CHH)

RAMNARESH GUPTA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5866/2025 · 2025-07-27

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:36480 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5866 of 2025 Ramnaresh Gupta S/o Govind Prasad Gupta Aged About 34 Years R/o Station Road, Naya Bazar Karvi, Chitrakoot, District Chitrakootdham (U.P.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ganj District Raipur (C.G.). ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 241/2024 registered at Police Station – Ganj, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) 506-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the victim has lodged a written complaint against the present applicant alleging that he established VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.07.29 18:45:22 +0530 2 physical relations with her and, during the course of such relationship, secretly captured her objectionable photographs without her consent. It is further alleged that the applicant thereafter started pressurizing her to marry him and threatened to circulate the said photographs on social media if she refused 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the victim is a major girl and she established relationship with the applicant on her own will and that she was consenting party. There is no credible evidence linking the applicant to the mobile number allegedly used to circulate objectionable photographs, and no device or such photographs have been recovered from his possession. The statements of the prosecutrix under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC are inconsistent, casting doubt on her credidue to personal enmity and lacks any prior criminal record. Moreover, the prosecutrix herself admitted to being in a consensual relationship with the applicant, and the present allegations arose only after the relationship deteriorated. No prima facie offence under Section 67 of the IT Act is made out, as there is no digital or forensic evidence connecting the applicant to the alleged act. The investigation is complete, the charge sheet has been filed, and continued incarceration is unwarranted. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.06.2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity of the offence, and further considering the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNS, which indicates that during a religious program she met the applicant and they exchanged contact details, after which the applicant called her to a hotel and allegedly raped her, and subsequently started blackmailing her through video calls and WhatsApp, threatening to expose the incident; furthermore, the victim's statement reveals that the applicant allegedly circulated an obscene video of her using different mobile numbers, harassed her, and pressurized her to marry and it is submitted by State counsel submitted that the trial is in progress and the statements of three witnesses, including the victim, have been recorded, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Ramnaresh Gupta, involved in Crime No. 241/2024 registered at Police Station – Ganj, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) 506-B of the Indian Penal Code, is rejected. 8. Office 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 vaibhav