1 2025:CGHC:52550 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1549 of 2025 1- Sitabai W/o Devkinandan Suryavanshi Aged About 57 Years R/o Village- Muktaraja, Ps. Baradwar, District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Amisha D/o Devkinandan Suryavanshi Aged About 25 Years (Wrongly Mentioned In Fir And Order Impugned, The Rea Name Is Anisha), R/o Village- Muktaraja, Ps. Baradwar, District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Manisha D/o Devkinandan Suryavanshi Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Muktaraja, Ps. Baradwar, District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 4- Dilip Kumar S/o Sidarram Aged About 42 Years R/o Village- Jharra, Ps. Saragaon, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Office, Police Station Baradwar, District- Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Kalyan Ji Kalamkar, Advocate and Mr. Hemant Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Swajeet Singh Ubweja, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28/10/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.222/2025 registered at Police Station – Baradwar ,District-Sakti (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.10.30 11:43:47 +0530 2 64(2)(m) of BNSS and Section 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix submitted a written complaint before the police station Baradwar against the present applicant/accused and their other family members wherein she has stated that she was familiar with the the present applicant when she was studying in class 10th in the session 2016-17 meantime the present applicant made physical relation with her by deceived her but she was not stated that to any one, due to fear of public shame. She further stated in her written complaint that the father, mother, sisters and maternal uncle of applicant has help him/accused by saying that they would marry her and keep her as their daughter in law which she believed, but they did not keep their promise. On 15-06-2025 at about 2pm the present applicant took her into a house situated near new bus stand Muktaraja and without her consent forcefully raped her, resulting in two abortions. Due to dear of social stigma, she did not inform her mother and family members about the incident. She further stated that the present applicant created obscene video and audio and is falsely propagating in the village by saying that she has a relationship with another person. Therefore, FIR has been lodged against the present applicants. Hence, this bail application. 3. In compliance of the order dated 09.10.2025 passed by this Court, prosecutrix is present before this Court along with her 3 parents and does not raised any objection in granting anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He would submit that prosecutrix is now aged about 24-25 years and she was in love affair with main accused Amit Kumar Suryavanshi and wants to marry with him and present applicants are family members of the main accused, but on refusing by the applicant, the prosecutrix implicated him along with his family members and all are being roped in the false and fabricated case by the prosecutrix. He further submits that prosecutrix is present before this Court today alongwith her parents and she has raised no objection in granting bail to the present applicants. He also submits that the investigation and trial are likely to take time, therefore, he submits that the present applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer 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, gravity of offence, also considering the fact that prosecutrix is a major girl and she was in love affair with main accused Amit Kumar Suryavanshi and wants to marry with him and present 4 applicants are family members of the main accused, but on refusing by the applicant for marriage, prosecutrix implicated him along with his family members and she did not raised objection for granting bail to the applicants, investigation and trial are likely to take time, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Sitabai, Amisha, Manisha, Dilip Kumar on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant 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 him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali