1 2025:CGHC:50341 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7993 of 2025 Mohammad Hasnain Khan S/o Mohammad Hussain Khan, Aged About 24 Years R/o Adarsh Nagar, Rajeev Gandhi Ward No. 33, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh P.S. Kotwali, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel, appears through video conferencing. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.10.2025 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. 345/2025 registered at Police Station - Kotwali Jagdalpur District - Bastar (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 64 of the VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.09 18:03:05 +0530 2 BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, the applicant and the prosecutrix were jointly operating a gym, where they became acquainted. Both the applicant and the prosecutrix belong to the same community. During their acquaintance, they developed an understanding regarding marriage, to which both families consented. Subsequently, their engagement was solemnized on 21.07.2022 in the presence of family members. It was agreed that the marriage would be solemnized after two years, following the marriage of the applicant's sister. However, after the lapse of two years, the marriage was further postponed due to the demise of the applicant's mother. On 15.04.2025, on the occasion of his birthday, the applicant called the prosecutrix to the gym named Lady Hustle and thereafter took her to his residence situated above Galaxy Mobile, at Pratapganj Para. There, the applicant allegedly told the prosecutrix that it had been three years since their engagement, and that if she did not consent to establishing physical relations with him as a "birthday gift," he would terminate the relationship. It is alleged that, by emotionally blackmailing her, the applicant forcibly established physical relations against her will. Subsequently, in July 2025, when the family members of the prosecutrix approached the applicant's family to fix the date of marriage, the applicant refused to marry and expressed his intention to break the engagement. On the basis of the aforesaid incident, Crime No. 345/2025 was registered at the concerned police station under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and investigation was initiated. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant was running a gym where the prosecutrix was employed as a trainer, and during this period, a relationship developed between them, eventually leading to their engagement. A copy of the engagement photographs is filed as Annexure A-3. It is pertinent to mention that after the engagement, the applicant came to know that the prosecutrix was already involved in an illicit relationship with another person, which is evident from the photographs placed on record. Upon learning of this fact, the applicant refused to marry her, following which, with mala fide intent, the prosecutrix falsely implicated the applicant under charges punishable under Section 64 of the B.N.S. (Annexure A-4). The FIR was lodged as part of a conspiracy hatched by the family members of the prosecutrix by fabricating a false incident. Both parties are adults and capable of making their own decisions, and there appears to have been no physical relationship between them; however, to pressurize the applicant into marriage, the present case has been falsely lodged. The evidence produced has been fabricated as part of a deliberate conspiracy, and the conduct of the prosecutrix an educated and independent woman clearly indicates falsity, as she did not inform anyone about the alleged incident for four months, suggesting that the complaint was filed under pressure. The applicant has been deprived of his personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, and the delay in the trial violates his right to a speedy trial. The charge-sheet has already been filed, and his prolonged detention is causing undue hardship to his family. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.08.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that in the present case, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the present applicant, and also taking into account that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.08.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Mohammad Hasnain Khan, involved in Crime No. 345/2025 registered at Police Station - Kotwali Jagdalpur District - Bastar (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 64 of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through 5 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 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