1 2025:CGHC:2807 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 80 of 2025 Tomesh Verma S/o K.K. Verma Aged About 37 Years R/o New Adarsh Nagar, Durg, P.S. Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Mohan Nagar, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Objector ; Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16.01.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the BNSS has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.0633/2024 registered at Police Station – Mohan Nagar, Durg District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 115(2) and 351(2) of B.N.S. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that a written complaint was made by the complainant / victim against the applicant before the concerned police station stating therein that she is residing along KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 with her husband and son aged about 12 years and earlier being a relative, the present applicant visited her home various times. It has been further stated that since then, the present applicant was having bad intention against her and whenever they used to meet in the family gatherings his intention was same. It has been further stated that on the date of incident i.e. on 31.08.24 when her husband went outside the home then the present applicant has entered in the house and by threatening her has forcefully committed sexual assault with her. Thereafter, when her husband returned home then she intimated the entire incident but due to family relationship she could not lodged complaint but subsequently due to mental harassment on 20.12.2024, she has lodged the complaint. Thereafter on the basis of complaint, the concerned police has registered the crime against the present applicant under Section 64, 115(2) and 351(2) of B.N.S. Hence this anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has no connection with the alleged crime whatsoever. He further submits that as per the complaint, the date of incident is of 31.08.24 and the F.I.R. has been lodged on 20.12.24, there is huge delay in lodging the complaint, which has not been properly explained. The victim is a major lady aged about 41 years who knows all her good and bad but immediately after marriage with cousin in the year 2012 she was in relationship with the present applicant. The victim has an education 3 qualification of M.S.C. from Kalyan College Bhilai and she is forward looking lady with free mind and liberated thoughts. He further submits that the entire story has been falsely created by the complainant/victim only when the fact regarding relationship between her and present applicant came into the knowledge of her husband, whereas she was in consensual relationship with the present applicant since long time. If the entire whatsapp chat will be seen then this is a clear case where she herself was emotionally attached with the present applicant and has several times requested the present applicant to visit her home. He also submits that as per the complaint, the said incident is of 31.08.24 whereas as per the whatsapp chat even after the incident she was in continue relationship with the present applicant. It is pertinent to mention herewith that on 06.09.24 she had kept "Teej fasting" for the present applicant and has sent her photographs wearing Sari, which clearly shows that the consensual relationship between the complainant and the present applicant was continued. The present applicant is a government employee and if the instant application will not be allowed then his entire career will be spoiled. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory 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 present applicant has entered in the house and by threatening her has forcefully committed sexual assault with her. Thereafter, 4 when her husband returned home then she intimated the entire incident but due to family relationship, she could not lodged complaint but subsequently due to mental harassment on 20.12.2024, she has lodged the complaint. Hence, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. Ms. Aditi Singhvi, learned counsel appearing for the objector opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the complainant made a complaint before the police that the applicant is her brother-in-law and is posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police in Sukma. In the year, 2020, the applicant had stayed with the family of the complainant and had bad intention towards the complainant. Thereafter, on 31.08.2025, the husband of the victim was not at home, when the applicant came to her house at around 7:20 PM, forcefully entered the house and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. When the husband of the complainant came back home on the next day i.e. 01.09.2024, she informed him about the incidence, which was earlier ignored by the husband of the victim and thereafter, being a family matter the same was brushed aside. However, due to continuous harassment by the applicant and his mother the complainant filed a report before the police on 20.12.2024. She further submits that prior to the registration of FIR, the instant case being a family matter, the complainant and her family members wanted the same to be resolved amicably, however, after continuous harassment by the applicant and his family 5 members, the complainant approached the police to file the complaint. Since the applicant himself is in police, the complaint was not being registered at first however, after complaint was made to the higher officials, the complaint was registered, and hence there was a slight delay in registration of FIR. The applicant had earlier also sexually assaulted the complainant in the month of November, 2023 and the applicant herein earlier also used to harass the complainant and send her messages after which a complaint was filed by the complainant/victim on 21.08.2024. The applicant, thereafter, executed a notarized affidavit wherein he has stated that he had tried to meet the complainant with malafide intentions. He has also admitted the chats, videos and CCTV footages and stated that he wants to settle the matter. Earlier also the applicant had apologized to the complainant vide a signed letter dated 11.04.2024 for harassing her. The complaint had not taken the matter before police as the same was between the family members and she did not want the matter to be taken before police and Courts. Hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and further the fact that from perusal of the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, It appears that the victim is a married 6 woman and involved in physical relationship with the applicant since long time and when their relationship could not be materialized, she lodged the FIR against the applicant and also considering the fact that there is a huge delay in lodging the FIR for which no reasonable explanation has been offered by the other side, 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- Tomesh Verma, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on anticipatory 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 their 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. 9. Learned State counsel assures the Court that the investigation and charge-sheet would be submitted soon before the competent 7 Court and the concerned trial Court shall conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of filing of the charge-sheet, if there is no legal impediment. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal