1 2025:CGHC:61552 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1873 of 2025 Mahesh Yadav S/o Jagdish Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o Dumarbahar, Chowki-Kardega, Police Station- Tapkara, District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Chowki- Kotba, Police Station, Bagbahar, District- Jashpur (C.G.) (Wrongly Mentioned As Police Station- Tapkara) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17.12.2025 1. Learned State counsel submits that notice was served upon the victim on 09.12.2025. He produced a copy of the service of notice, which has been received from the concerned police station and is taken on record. When the matter was taken up, the victim did not appear to raise any objection. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.17 15:38:41 +0530 2 2. 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. 96/2025 registered at Police Station – Chowki Kotba, Police Station Bagbahar District – Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2) 64(2)(M) 87 of the BNS and Sections 4 & 6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 26.09.2025, the father of prosecutrix lodged report, alleging therein that the applicant has eloped his minor daughter and detained her in his house by giving assurance to her since of marriage 22.09.2025. The complainant along with his family members went to the house of applicant for bringing the prosecutrix, but the applicant has not allowed her to return her house. On the basis of said report, the alleged offences have been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is stated that the applicant and the prosecutrix are well known to each other, belong to the same caste, and are relatives. The applicant has neither eloped with nor detained the prosecutrix at his house; rather, she voluntarily came to the applicant’s house, and upon coming to know of the same, her family members took her back. It is further submitted that thereafter the prosecutrix again came to the applicant’s house, due to which her family members lodged a false and fabricated complaint against the applicant. Considering the conduct of the prosecutrix, it is evident that she was a willing and consenting party, and therefore the alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. The applicant is a 3 reputed person, and his arrest would cause irreparable damage to his reputation. He further undertakes to abide by all directions and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the material available in the case diary, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it prima facie appears that the victim, who is about 17 years of age, voluntarily eloped with the present applicant and that both were in a consensual relationship. Subsequently, their relationship could not materialize, as a result of which the present FIR came to be lodged by the victim on the ground that the applicant refused to marry her, therefore, without further commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Mahesh Yadav, 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 4 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