1 / 4 2025:CGHC:50085 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1534 of 2025 Satish Mishra S/o Late Shri Ramkumar Mishra Aged About 37 Years R/o Kailash Nagar, Kavardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Mahila Thana, Kabirdham (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Khan, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Puranchand, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.10.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.41/2025 registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana Kabirdham, Kavardha (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69,81 & 351(3) of the BNS 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that, on 12.09.2025 a written report lodged by 'the prosecutrix in which she has mentioned that about two year back a complaint was registered against her brother and because VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.08 18:52:49 +0530 2 / 4 of which she frequently visited the police station, at that time she met with the applicant It is further contended by the prosecutrix that on 21.05.2025 the applicant made a call to the prosecutrix in one café and thereafter on the pretext of marriage he committed sexual intercourse with her. It is further contended by the prosecutrix that due to threatening given by the applicant she kept mum. Further alleged by the prosecutrix that on 06.07.2025 the applicant perform marriage with the prosecutrix in the Arya Samaj Mandir and thereafter he committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix several times. It is specifically alleged by the prosecutrix that the applicant continued to maintain physical relations with her on several occasions by repeatedly assuring her of marriage. On the basis of the aforesaid application the Mahila Thana, District-Kabirdham, (C.G) registered the above referred offences punishable under Section 69,81, 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the prosecutrix, being a major aged about 27 years, was in a consensual relationship with the applicant, during which physical relations were established with her free will and consent. Thereafter, when the relationship did not materialize into marriage, the prosecutrix lodged the present F.I.R., which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. A copy of the F.I.R. dated 12.09.2025 is filed herewith as Annexure A/2. From the perusal of the entire prosecution story, it is evident that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and, despite being aware of the applicant’s marital status, she willingly maintained the relationship. Therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. The F.I.R. 3 / 4 itself reveals that the applicant and the prosecutrix had solemnized their marriage at Arya Samaj, which makes the allegations regarding physical relations on the pretext of marriage completely baseless and false. It is also relevant to mention that on 12.09.2025, the applicant had lodged a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Kabirdham, specifically apprehending that the prosecutrix might implicate him in a false case; a copy of the same is filed herewith as Annexure A/3. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, possessing both movable and immovable property there, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with prosecution evidence or witnesses. The applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the directions and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as objector in person opposed the bail application of the applicant and submits that the present applicant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the victim and thereafter denied, therefore he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and upon perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it appears that the victim is a major lady aged about 27 years, and that she and the applicant were in a consensual relationship and had established physical relations for about two years. The victim was also aware of the fact that the applicant was 4 / 4 already a married person thereafter, as their relationship could not materialize, the victim lodged the present FIR on the ground that the applicant refused to marry her therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Satish Mishra, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) He 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) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) He 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) He shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav