Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55998 (CHH)

JAI PRAKASH TOPPO v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/6619/2025 · 2025-08-20

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:42431 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6619 of 2025 Jai Prakash Toppo S/o Ramlal Toppo Aged About 40 Years R/o Balrampur, P.S- Balrampur, Distt- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station- Balrampur, Distt- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Soumya Sharma, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21/08/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.59/2025 registered at Police Station Balrampur, Distt- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 64(2), 296 & 351(3) of BNS. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.08.25 18:19:55 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.5.2025, prosecutrix aged about 34 years, lodged the written report before the police station Balrampur, alleging that in the year 2022, she was posted on the post of Nagar Sainik in traffic Balrampur and at the same time, applicant was also posted in traffic Balrampur and during duty hour there was normal conversation between applicant and prosecurtix. On 22.9.2022 at about 9.00 a.m, the present applicant took her to his rented room at Mariam Para and committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage, thereafter he regularly committed sexual intercourse with her. On the basis of his pretext of marriage, prosecutrix gave divorce to her husband on stamp paper but after divorce with her husband, applicant denied for marriage, then the prosecurtix lodged the report before the police station Balrampur. On the basis of written report, police registered the alleged offences against the present applicant and arrested him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the victim is a married women and the applicant too is also a married person as the victim’s husband deserted her she came in contact with the applicant and they established relationship. It is stated that though the victim in her 183 BNSS statement has stated that the applicant established physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage and stated that he will marry the victim when she will divorce her husband and as per the statement given by her in 183 BNSS she also had written on a stamp paper some times in August 2024 she has divorced her husband but then too the applicant did not marry her. He has pointed out that the 3 statement of the victim has been recorded by the trial court and she has stated that because of some dispute between the two, she lodged the present FIR. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since 14/05/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and she would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that the victim in her 183 BNSS statement has stated that the applicant established physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage and stated that he will marry the victim when she will divorce her husband and as per the statement given by her in 183 BNSS she also had written on a stamp paper some times in August 2024 she has divorced her husband but then too the applicant did not marry her and further the fact that the statement of the victim has been recorded by the trial court and she has stated that because of some dispute between the two, she lodged the present FIR, but considering the fact that as the trial is in progress and the statement of victim has already been recorded, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Jai Prakash Toppo involved in Crime No.59/2025 registered at Police Station Balrampur, 4 Distt- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 64(2), 296 & 351(3) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri