1 2025:CGHC:473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1447 of 2024 1. Dilharan Banjare S/o Late Shri Amrit Lal Banjare Aged About 48 Years R/o Near Gyan Jyoti School Pamgarh Police Station Pamgarh District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) 2. Ganeshi Banjare W/o Dilharan Banjare Aged About 46 Years R/o Near Gyan Jyoti School Pamgarh Police Station Pamgarh District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Pamgarh District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G) ---- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.01.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the 2 applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.521/2024 registered at Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 127(4), 61(2), 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m) [wrongly mentioned as 64(2) (I)and 64(2)(M) in the impugned order-sheet] of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4, 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the complainant lodged a report in Police Station -Pamgarh regarding wrongful confinement and rape of her minor daughter under criminal conspiracy between the present applicants and their son. On the basis of report lodged by the complainant, Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) registered First Information Report bearing Crime No. 521/2024 for the offence punishable under Section 127(4), 61(2), 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita & Section 4, 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the present applicants and their minor son who is less than 18 years of age and investigation has been initiated. The matter is being investigated by the police of Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) and charge-sheet has not been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case, they are innocent, they have not committed any offence. He further submits that the present applicant No.1 is working as Secretary of 3 Village Panchayat and presently posted at Village Amgaon, Janpad Panchayat Masturi, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) whereas applicant No.2 is a teacher who is presently posted in Govt. Primary School, Gajpurwapara, Loharsi, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). It is respectfully submitted by the present applicants that the after the incident the real fact between the parties, the complainant and the present applicants and their son is that two minor children who are son of the present applicants and daughter of the complainant came into contact through mobile phone and started gossip with each other through mobile phones and during their friendship in the month of July, the present applicants were called through mobile phone by complainant and one of his friends whereby it was disclosed that daughter of the complainant has consumed poison for marriage with the son of the applicants, due to aforesaid reason, a social meeting was called by the complainant which was accepted by the applicants where it was disclosed that there is one-sided love by the daughter of complainant to the son of the applicants and if she does not get married with the son of the applicants then she will commit suicide, then the present applicants and their son accepted that they will perform marriage of the victim girl when they will attain the age of majority and thus the social meeting was concluded with a compromise that marriage will be solemnized after getting majority. 4 4. Learned counsel for the applicants further argued that in the month of September, 2024, the present applicants were pressurized by various means for marriage of the son then due to pressure of the society and complainant, engagement ceremony was called on 15.09.2024 and in the engagement it was clearly disclosed by the applicants that as the children are minors, therefore, after engagement they will not meet with each other up to getting the age of majority which was accepted by the complainant and her daughter. The son of the present applicants after his engagement on 15.09.2024 returned back to his rental house at Bilaspur where he started his studies as he is a student of Class-12th (Agriculture) and the complainant along with her children started living in another rental house at Bilaspur and the minor children never met with each other in Bilaspur. One day in the month of October, 2024, the present applicants were called through mobile phones at about 9 PM night that the minor daughter of the complainant was attempting to commit suicide and present applicants were requested to reach immediately then the present applicants and some other relatives reached to the rental house of the complainant where the present applicants were requested to take the minor girl their house as she is now their daughter-in-law which was refused to do so by the applicants then they were threatened to be implicated in criminal offence then they took the minor girl to their house for coming festival Deepawali and requested to the complainant that after festival the 5 girl will reside in her parental house. He further respectfully submitted that after 2-4 days of the Deepawali, the present applicants called the complainant through mobile phone either they take back or they will drop the minor girl to her parental house as she was taken by them only for Deepawali Festival then on their consent the minor son of the present applicants took the minor girl to her parental house on 10.11.2024 and dropping his fiance to her parental house returned back to his house and after few days the present applicants were threatened by the complainant that if any untoward incident happens with the minor girl then they will finish the consequences. After being scared from the aforesaid threatening by the complainant, they went to Police Station to lodge report regarding threatening but the report was not lodged by the police on the ground that it is a case of family dispute regarding marriage of children and there is no criminal offence in the matter and the present applicants were advised by the police to call a social meeting and enter into compromise to resolve the dispute. As per the instruction of the police, the present applicants called social meeting where it was advised by the Suryavanshi Samaj that as the children are minor therefore, they will live in their parental house up to getting the age of majority and after being major they will be tied in the bonds of marriage but the complainant and her daughter refused to accepted the advise of the society members then the social meeting was completed without giving any opinion in the matter 6 and told that the parties free to do as they want because the complainant and her daughter are not agree to accept the advise and opinion of the social meeting and that after a few days they received information through some reliable sources that a false, fabricated and delayed report has been lodged against them and their son for the offence punishable under Section 127(4), 61(2), 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita & section 4, 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 which is incorrect in the light of aforementioned entire facts of the case as per which the present applicants and their son are victim and no offence has been committed by them, therefore, they are entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicants/accused are reported to be absconding, indicating non-cooperation with the investigation and further no documents have been presented to prove that the applicants/accused are government servants, which undermines their credibility. Hence, they are 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 & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material 7 available in case diary and further the fact that the present applicants are the government servants and have no criminal antecedents therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Dilharan Banjare and Ganeshi Banjare, on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) They 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicants 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) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal