1 / 4 2025:CGHC:55674 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8664 of 2025 Mohsin S/o Md. Sarfraj Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Chakghanshyam Das, Post- Karma Karchhana, Police Station- Ghurpur, District- Prayagraj, Allahabad (U.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Podi, District- M.C.B. (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate For State /Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 14/11/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 08/07/2025 in connection with Crime No. 13/2025, registered at Police Station Podi, District M.C.B., C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2) (m) (wrongly mentioned 64 (2) (n) in the impugned order) 65, 87 of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.14 18:30:43 +0530 2 / 4 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 19/02/2025 at about 11.00 PM on the pretext of marriage the applicant called the victim and took her at Allahabad, thereafter, there made physical relations with her. Thereafter, on the complaint of the brother of the prosecutrix an FIR was registered against the applicant and the present applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the brother of the victim, who lodged the FIR gave his no objection before the learned trial Court. He would next contend that the medical report do not corroborate the commission of forceful rape as no external and internal injuries were found on the body part of the victim. He would next contend that even the prosecutrix is a major lady. He would next contend that the before the court of JMFC, Chirmiri the prosecutrix and her mother have admitted that the prosecutrix is a major lady and the applicant has not committed anything with her. He would next contend that the applicant and prosecutrix have performed marriage. He would lastly contend that the applicant is in jail since 08/07/2025 and the charge-sheet in this case has been filed, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. The prosecutrix along with her mother appeared through VC from DLSA Chirmiri and she recorded her no objection with regard to grant of bail to the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. Perusal of the documents would show that the applicant and the prosecutrix have performed marriage and the no objection has been given by the prosecutrix and her mother with regard to grant of bail to 3 / 4 the applicant as such it is a case of love affair between the applicant and the prosecutrix, therefore, considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Let applicant Mohsin, involved in Crime No.13/2025, under Sections 137 (2), 64 (2) (m) (wrongly mentioned 64 (2) (n) in the impugned order) 65, 87 of the B.N.S. and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, police station Podi, District M.C.B., C.G., be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond to the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like amount 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (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, 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to 4 / 4 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 Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. (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 2023. 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu