1 2025:CGHC:48156 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1361 of 2025 • Mohammad Shami S/o. Noor Mohammad, Aged About 33 Years R/o. 133 Shanti Nagar, Chandra Nagar, Kohka, Ward No. 14, Supela Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Supela, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.09.2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.886/2025 registered at Police Station – Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 296, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that incident was occurred in between 09.04.2022 to 11.07.2025 and the F.I.R. was lodged on VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.09.19 17:28:55 +0530 2 30.07.2025, inter alia on the and allegations that, the applicant the complainant/prosecutrix were known to each other from 2022. The complainant is a widow lady, her husband died on 2012 and she was residing with her mother. It has been alleged that, in 2022 the applicant has made proposal for marriage and on 09.04.2022 at about 02:30 O'clock in the afternoon the applicant has committed sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage and subsequently on 11.07.2025 the applicant at about 04:00 O'clock has committed last sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. It has been further alleged that, the applicant has subsequently refused to marry. It has been alleged that, the applicant has borrowed an amount of Rs. 11 lacs from the complainant and out of the said amount only Rs. 2 lacs were repaid and still Rs. 9 lacs is due against the applicant. The F.I.R. has been registered under Section 69, 296, 351(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the case has been shown as sensitive, therefore the F.I.R. of Crime No. 886/2025 has not been uploaded on the website and the copy of the same is not available on the website and therefore the applicant is not in a position to file the same, hence, he is also liable for action. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant is that the present applicant and the prosecutrix were in a relationship and were known each other since 2022. She was a consenting party. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant is that victim is a married women and having two children. Further there was consensual relationship between them and applicant is a businessman and victim used to blackmail him for demanding 3 money. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submits that as per the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNS, in which she stated that prosecutrix and present applicant were in a relationship and they were known each other since 2022 and after some time present applicant started communicating with the prosecutrix over the phone and told her he loved her, during this period on 09.04.2022, applicant made physical relation with her on the pretext of marriage at different times, when she became pregnant, applicant taken her to the hospital induce an abortion, 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, levelled against the present applicant and looking to the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNS, wherein she has admitted that the applicant and prosecutrix was in contact since 2022, prosecutrix is major lady and she was consenting party. Therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant –Mohammad Shami on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 4 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) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant 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 alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali