1 2025:CGHC:4043 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 114 of 2025 Puranik Das Lahre S/o Shri Bhadu Das Lahre Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Mariyatola, Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Out Post-Damapur, Police Station Kunda, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.01.2025 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.02/2025 registered at Police Station – Kunda, Out Post- Damapur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the victim has lodged a report before the Police Station Kunda, District Kabirdham, against the present applicant alleging therein that on false pretext of marriage, the present applicant made physical relationship with her in her KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 rental house at Village Damapur on 05.03.2015 and thereafter repeatedly made physical relationship with her on false pretext of marriage and it is further stated that lastly the physical relationship was made by the present applicant in the rental house of the victim at Darripara on 30.06.2024. It is alleged that the present applicant deceived her and made physical relationship up to 10 years and also kept her in a rental house at Village Majhgaon for 5 years. It is further alleged that on conversation regarding marriage, the physical relationship was made on threatening to cause death and it was also threatened by the present applicant that he is a policeman, therefore, nothing can be done against him. On the basis of written report preferred by the victim, the police registered an offence bearing Crime No. 02/2025 for the offence punishable under section 376(2)(n), 506 of Indian penal code against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation that on the pretext of marriage she was sexually exploited by the present applicant since last about 10 years which seems to be false and baseless. Even if the entire case of the victim/ complainant is taken as it is no offence under section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code is made out. Neither forcibly sexual intercourse nor physical relationship without consent of the victim was made by the present applicant and it is clear that false promise of marriage cannot be made as she is well 3 educated lady who knows the pros and cons of such a relationship and entered into it with wide and open eyes based on her consent and volition, therefore, the offence under Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code would not be made out against the applicant. He further submits that the physical relationship between the complainant and present applicant was admittedly consensual. In the First Information Report the victim stated that her consent was based on a false assurance of marriage by the accused but since the aspect of assurance acknowledged consensual stands falsified, the physical relationship between the parties would not constitute for aforesaid offence. He later submits that there is inordinate delay in lodging the report as time of offence is stated to be from 05.03.2015 to 30.06.2024 and report is lodged on 04.01.2025, therefore, from the first date of relationship it is about 10 years delay and from the last date of alleged crime more than 06 months delay in lodging the report. He also submit that the present applicant is working at Police Department and presently posted on the post of Head Constable. 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 prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that the applicant allegedly established a physical relationship with the victim under the false promise of marriage, which continued for over 10 years. He subsequently refused to marry her, resulting in her becoming 4 pregnant twice. As such, the applicant 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, 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 BNSS, it appears that the victim/complainant and the applicant were involved in physical relationship for more than 10 years and when their relationship could not be materialized, she lodged the FIR against the applicant for the pretext of marriage and also considering the fact that there is huge delay in lodging the FIR for about 10 years for which there is no any explanation has been offered by the other side, hence, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant- Puranik Das Lahre, 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 5 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. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal