1 2025:CGHC:44325 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6881 of 2025 Vivek Miri S/o Dharamdas Miri Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Devrani, P.S. Suhela Dist- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Hathband, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Tanuj Patwardhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 01.09.2025 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 58/2025, registered at Police Station Hathband, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 351(2) of the BNS, and Section 67B of the I.T. Act. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, is that the victim lodged written complaint in the P.S. Hathband to the effect that in the year 2024 she went to meet her aunt (bua) at village Devrani where she met the RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 applicant and after sometime they got acquainted with each other and developed love affair relationship. She returned to her native village Mohbhattha where the applicant used to visit her house and used to ask her to marry him. On the night of 03/01/2025 when no one was in the house as every member of the family went to Bhatapara, applicant visited her house and made forceful physical relationship and recorded the video by threatening her to life, he further threat her to not share the incident anyone otherwise he will make sure to viral the said video. Later on she got engaged at village Khamhariya and on 20-03-2025 the applicant sent the objectionable video to her fiancé due to which her marriage broke out. On the basis of which the applicant was arrested by the police. Hence, this application. 3. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3833 of 2025. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It has been further submitted that the victim is a major girl, and as per the statement of the victim, the victim and the applicant were having some affair and they have established consensual sexual relationship. The applicant is in jail since 21.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, it transpires that though the applicant and the victim were having affair and they have established 3 consensual physical relationship, but the applicant is said to have made videos of the incident, and as the family members were against the marriage and they have arranged the engagement of the victim with another person, the applicant sent those videos to the fiance of the victim, on account of which the marriage of the victim cancelled. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and from the perusal of the case-diary and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, it transpires that though the applicant and the victim were having affair and they have established consensual physical relationship, but the applicant is said to have made videos of the incident, and as the family members were against the marriage and they have arranged the engagement of the victim with another person, the applicant sent those videos to the fiance of the victim, on account of which the marriage of the victim cancelled, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. 8. Accordingly, this Second bail application of applicant – Vivek Miri involved in Crime No. 58/2025, registered at Police Station Hathband, District – Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 351(2) of the BNS, and Section 67B of the I.T. Act, is rejected at this stage. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a 4 period of three months from the date of passing of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Rajshekhar