1 2025:CGHC:10536 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8972 of 2024 • Vishwajeet Ghosh S/o Sapan Ghosh @ Swapan Ghosh Aged About 25 Years R/o Rajkishore Nagar, Thana- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur, C.G. Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur,, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For applicant : Mr. Amrito Das and Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Mr. Kishanlal Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 04/03/2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 415/2024 registered at Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29-7-2024 passed in MCRC No.5192 of 2 2024. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 05.05.2024 the victim lodged a written report in Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur alleging that on 07.12.2023 at about 8 PM, the applicant called her and took her to lonely place of Uslapur where on the false pretext of marriage, he committed forceful sexual intercourse with her in his car. Thereafter the applicant took her to Ujjain where he applied vermilion on her forehead and stated now we will reside as husband and wife and there he committed sexual intercourse with her. It is alleged that the victim disclosed the incident to the family member of the applicant then they asked her to abort the fetus in her womb and refused to accept her. It is also alleged that cousin brother of the applicant abused and assaulted her and the other family members of the applicant pressured her to abort the fetus and took her to Apollo Hospital for abortion then the victim did not agree for abortion and returned back. It is alleged that application for marriage was submitted by the applicant before the Registrar of Marriage but on the date of registration of marriage, neither he picked up her mobile nor he came there and made excuse that he was busy due to some urgent work. It is also alleged that while she was going to the house of the applicant for the purpose of marriage then the applicant in presence of his relative took her in his room where the applicant committed forceful sexual intercourse with her. On the basis of report lodged by the victim, the Police has registered the offence under Section 376 of the IPC against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He would further submit that the victim was in a consensual 3 relationship with the applicant since 2023 on her own willingness, shared her mobile number with him. He would further submit that the victim of her own free will visited different places with the applicant. He would further submit the victim is a major lady and well aware of the consequence of physical relationship despite that she has made physical relationship with the applicant. He would would further submit that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that there was consensual act done by the applicant, thus the offence does not fall within the ambit of Section 376 IPC. To substantiate his submission he has referred to the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana 2013(7) SCC 675,Kaini Rajan vs. State of Kerala 2013(9) SCC 113 and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2019(9) SCC 608 and would submit that since the alleged offence is a consensual act on the part of the victim, as such offence under Section 376 is not made out and prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and would submit that the complainant in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC has reiterated the incident mentioned in the FIR. He would further submit that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC has stated that she is aware that the applicant has heart aliment still she is ready to live with him. She has also stated that the applicant by taking shelter of his heart aliment has made an attempt for abortion which was objected by the victim and thereafter the attitude and behaviour of the applicant drastically changed, started assaulting her and creating pressure for abortion. He would further submit that the offence committed by the applicant is serious in nature, therefore, his bail application should be rejected. 4 5. The victim has appeared before this Court and would submit that the applicant has physically exploited her and made her pregnant on the false promise of marriage and committed sexual intercourse with her many times. She would further submit that after registration of FIR, parents of the applicant asked her to abort fetus in her womb and threatened her to withdraw the case. To substantiate her submission she has submitted the call details and would pray for rejecting the bail application of the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. The record would show that the statement of the victim has already been recoded before the trial Court on 18-2-2024 wherein she has stated that the victim was in l relation with the accused from the month of November, 2023 and they have visited various places like Indore, Ujjain, Amarkantak and Bangalore She has also stated that she has not prevented the accused to make relation with her. 8. Considering the statement of the victim, it is quite vivid that the victim and accused were in relation with each other for long period and also considering the age of the victim who is major girl at the time of incident and also the fact that the applicant is in jail since 5-5–2024, I am of the view that it is a fit case where the applicant should be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court 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 5 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the IPC. (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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.03.05 11:03:03 +0530