1 2025:CGHC:54378 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8891 of 2025 Jhamman Lal Sahu S/o Khemuram Sahu Aged About 24 Years (Wrongly Mentioned In Impugned Order Hemuram Sahu) R/o Lodhipara Durga Temple, Near Sarju Grocery Store, Khusipar District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Khursipar, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 200/2025, registered at Police Station - Khursipar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) and 351(3) of Bharartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (corresponding Section 376, 506 of IPC). 2. As per the prosecution, on 23.08.2025 the victim who is married and educated lady reported before the Police Station Khursipar that she, and the applicant well known to each other, both used to go each other home. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.11.07 15:58:58 +0530 2 On July 2025, the applicant/accused called her that his mother is calling to her, then she went to the house of the applicant, there the applicant made forcefully physical relationship with her and also threatened if she tell anyone, that condition he will kill her and her family. On 17.08.2025 again when the applicant was calling to the victim through mobile phone that time her husband saw, and enquired the matter after that finally the complainant submitted a written complain before the Police Station- Khursipar. The Police Station- Khursipar registered and FIR under Section 64(1), 351(3) of the BNS, at this stage investigation is going on. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the victim is a married woman having children, and that she was a consenting party. When the husband of the victim came to know about the relationship, the victim lodged the FIR against the applicant in order to save herself. It is also submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed in this case. The applicant has been in custody since 24.08.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time. Therefore, the learned counsel prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and period of detention in jail, and from the perusal of the statement, it transpires that the victim is a married woman having children, and that she was a consenting party, 3 when the husband of the victim came to know about the relationship, the victim lodged the FIR against the applicant in order to save herself, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed in this case, the applicant has been in custody since 24.08.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Jhamman Lal Sahu involved in Crime No. 200/2025, registered at Police Station - Khursipar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) and 351(3) of Bharartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (corresponding Section 376, 506 of IPC), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under 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 4 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 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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. 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 him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti