1 2025:CGHC:190 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9060 of 2024 Rameshwar Pandey Alias Raju S/o Prakash Narayan Pandey Aged About 40 Years R/o Hall Sai City, Chandrakhuri, P.S. - Mandir Hasaud, Distt. - Raipur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. A.V. Shridhar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.2025 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. 458/2024 registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (In short, IPC). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Complainant/victim made a written complaint before the Police Station concerned that she is a resident of Tikrapara Raipur, accused/applicant is her brother-in-law and she was well acquainted with him, applicant always tried to 2 persuade the victim that he loves her and wanted to marry with her and tried to pressurize her to leave her husband, on 08.06.2024 the applicant telephonically called the victim and asked her to come to Vidhan Sabha Road, Raipur, Distt Raipur when she denied to come, accused threatened her that if she will not come he will kill her husband, out of the threat she went to the said location on her scooty, thereafter, accused took the victim to his house situated at Chandrakhuri Sai City and against her will made a physical relationship with her, when victim returned to home upon asking by her husband Hirendra pandey, she revealed the incident to her husband. Thereafter, on 13.06.2024 she made a complaint before the Police Station. Hence, this application. 3. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.09.2024 passed in MCRC No. 6059 of 2024, on the ground that the applicant who is the brother-in-law of the victim has threatened to kill husband and children of the victim and had forcibly raped the victim and made obscene videos. 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 and the applicant were in love affair from last 15 years and both are the relatives, the relationship between both of them were disclosed before the husband which was resultant of the present FIR. The applicant is in jail since 17.06.2024, 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 3 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 the victim is a major married lady, and the applicant who is the brother-in-law of the victim has threatened to kill husband and children of the victim and had forcibly raped the victim and made obscene videos, on which ground the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court. 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 the victim is a major married lady, and the applicant who is the brother-in-law of the victim has threatened to kill husband and children of the victim and had forcibly raped the victim and made obscene videos, on which ground the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court and other good ground has been raised by the counsel for the applicant in the present bail application, thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, this Second bail application of applicant – Rameshwar Pandey Alias Raju involved in Crime No. 458/2024 registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC, is 4 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 period of six months from the date of passing of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment, as has been ordered by this Court. 10. OfÏce 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