1 2025:CGHC:53915 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8744 of 2025 Ashish Ahirwar @ Ashish Choudhary S/o Shri Laxman Choudhary Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bachera, Tahsil Bhauranipur, Thana Todi, Distt. Jhanshi. U.P. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Durgukondal, Distt. North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. … Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shreyansh Pathak, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.11.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed 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. 19/2025 registered at Police Station : Durgukondal District – North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(m) & 332(B) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in short is that, that in crime number-19/2025 of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.11.04 18:38:53 +0530 2 Police Station - Durdukondal, the crime of section 64(2) (m), 332 (B) BNS was registered against the applicant and, it is alleged that on between 10.00 pm on the night of 20.02.2025 to 6.00 am on 22.02.2025 at the rented house of the applicant situated at village- Karramad under, by promising to marry her, without any intention of fulfilling it, by threatening her, by forcibly having sexual intercourse with her more than once, committed rape. On the basis of said information police has registered offence and arrested the present applicant and after completing the investigation charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The alleged incident took place on 20.02.2025, whereas the FIR was lodged after an inordinate delay in April 2025, for which no satisfactory explanation has been provided by the prosecutrix, thereby casting serious doubt on the veracity of the prosecution story and suggesting afterthought and false implication. The applicant, a permanent resident of the State of Uttar Pradesh, came into contact with the prosecutrix, a resident of Chhattisgarh, through social media, and their acquaintance gradually developed into a love relationship. The allegation of forcible sexual intercourse is false and improbable, as the applicant, residing in another State, could not have entered the house of the prosecutrix without consent. Even if it is assumed that any physical relationship took place between them, the same was purely consensual, without any element of force, coercion, or threat. The prosecutrix, being a 20- 3 year-old major and educated girl, was fully capable of understanding the nature and consequences of her actions, and the relationship was based on mutual affection and consent. The prosecution has failed to collect any cogent or reliable evidence to substantiate the allegations or to prove the age of the prosecutrix beyond doubt. The applicant, a 19-year-old young boy, has been in custody since 11.05.2025, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel State opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present applicant on the pretext of marriage established physical relationship with the victim and thereafter denied, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the victim, being a major, was in a consensual relationship with the applicant during which a physical relationship was established, and thereafter, their relationship could not materialize, consequently leading to the lodging of the present FIR also considering the fact that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant has been in jail since 11.05.2025 and that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 4 7. 4 7. Let applicant, Ashish Ahirwar @ Ashish Choudhary, involved in Crime No. 19/2025 registered at Police Station : Durgukondal District – North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(m) & 332(B) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the 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 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 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 5 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 forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav