1 2025:CGHC:59436 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10033 of 2025 Mukesh Sahu S/o Maghi Lal Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Dhourabhatha, Police Station- Hirri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O1cer, Police Station- Hirri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.12.2025 1. This is the First bail application 8led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 219/2025 registered at Police Station : Hirri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 12.09.2025, the complainant/victim lodged a report at Police Station Hirri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) alleging that on 11.09.2025 at about 7:00 PM, while she had gone to dispose of dirty water near her house, the present applicant, her neighbour Mukesh Sahu, allegedly caught her hand, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 pressed her mouth, took her behind his house and forcibly committed sexual intercourse. On this report, FIR No. 219/2025 was registered under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During investigation, the victim was medically examined at Community Health Center, Bilha, where the doctor found no bleeding, redness, tenderness, vaginal tear or signs of recent intercourse, and noted that the hymen tear was old and self- repaired; therefore, no de8nite opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse could be given. The applicant was arrested, articles were seized, statements of the victim under Section 183 BNSS and other witnesses were recorded, and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was 8led before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Bilaspur. The case is now pending as Sessions Case No. 262/2025 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Bilaspur for trial. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and no o;ence under Section 64(1) BNS is made out. It is argued that there is a one-day delay in lodging the FIR and the explanation mentioned therein appears to be an afterthought. It is further submitted that the victim’s own statement under Section 183 BNSS and the statements of her brother-in-law and husband indicate that she was seen in a consensual position with the applicant, after which a false and fabricated report was lodged. He contends that despite the allegation of forcible intercourse on a rough surface, the medical examination reveals no external or internal injuries, and the doctor 3 has opined that no exact opinion regarding recent intercourse can be given, which supports the defence of false implication due to some family dispute. Both the applicant and the victim are major, and even if any incident occurred, it was consensual in nature. The applicant, aged 25 years, has no criminal antecedent, the charge- sheet has already been 8led, and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that the allegations against the applicant are grave and relate to an o;ence under Section 64(1) of the BNS, which carries serious consequences. It is argued that the victim has given a consistent version in the FIR as well as in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, speci8cally naming the applicant and alleging forcible sexual intercourse. The medical report does not rule out the possibility of sexual assault and only states that no de8nite opinion regarding recent intercourse can be given, which does not negate the victim’s clear statement. It is further submitted that the applicant is a neighbour of the victim and may inEuence or threaten her or other material witnesses if released on bail. Considering the seriousness of the o;ence, the nature of allegations, and the possibility of interference with the trial, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of o;ence and from the perusal of statement of victim recorded, it appears that the victim who is a already married woman aged about 23 years having a consensual relationship with the applicant and she was a consenting party and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant is in jail since 13.09.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Mukesh Sahu, involved in Crime No. 219/2025 registered at Police Station : Hirri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 8le an undertaking to the e;ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 8xed 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 8xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su1cient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under 5 Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date 8xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 8xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su1cient 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. 8. O1ce is directed to send a certi8ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan