1 2025:CGHC:61847 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1972 of 2025 Gyandeep Pandey S/o Tretanath Pandey Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Nahar Road, Opposite Petrol Pump, Belsari Takhatpur, Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur C.G. ---- Non-Applicant(s) (Cause Title is taken from the Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Amit Soni, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.12.2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.681/2025 registered at Police Station Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 351(2) of BNS. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the victim lodged a report before the concerned police station alleging therein that she was working in the rice mill of the applicant and that the applicant had been looking at her with wrongful intentions and attempting to touch her while talking to her for the last one year. It is alleged that on 06.11.2025, at around 6:00 PM, the applicant molested the victim by holding her hand, saying “he love her,” and placing his hand on her chest. When she attempted to leave, the applicant allegedly prevented her from going home. The victim, however, managed to free herself and returned home. It is further alleged that thereafter the applicant went to the victim’s house and threatened that if she did not marry him and live with him, he would kill her and her family. The victim, after a delay of 16 days from the date of the alleged incident, lodged a report on 22.11.2025 before the concerned police station. On the basis of the said complaint, the instant FIR has been registered, after a delay of 16 days, against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 74 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (corresponding to Sections 354 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code). Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, as the First Information Report has been lodged at the instance of the complainant with the sole intention of settling personal scores and evading repayment of a substantial advance amount of ₹3,95,000/- received by her during the course of her employment at the applicant’s firm through bank transactions. It is contended that when the applicant demanded return of the said amount, the 3 complainant, who had stopped attending the workplace, lodged the present FIR as a counterblast, making false and fabricated allegations of molestation and criminal intimidation merely to pressurize the applicant into foregoing his lawful financial claim and to tarnish his reputation. The FIR is thus malicious, vexatious and a clear abuse of the process of law, filed with an ulterior motive amounting to arm-twisting and extortion. It is further submitted that there is an inordinate and unexplained delay of about 18 days in lodging the FIR in respect of the alleged incident dated 06.11.2025, which seriously dents the credibility of the prosecution version. He further submits that the applicant is a permanent resident of Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, having deep roots in society, a settled family with two children and an established rice mill business, and therefore there is no likelihood of his absconding or misusing liberty. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material available in case diary and further the fact that the unexplained delay of about 16 days in lodging the FIR, the submissions regarding the prior financial dispute between the parties, thus 4 without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Gyandeep Pandey, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, 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 their adhaar card alongwith a colored 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 Rajshekhar