1 2025:CGHC:57273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9172 of 2025 1 - Mithlesh Dhimar S/o Baldau Dhimar Aged About 20 Years R/o Road Para Chandkhuri, P.S. Pulgaon, District Durg C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station- Pulgaon, District Durg C.G. ... Respondent(s) For applicant(s) : Shri Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/11/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 331/2024 registered at police SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.11.28 11:09:36 +0530 2 station Pulgaon, District Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2),87,83 and 64(1)of the BNS and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Facts of the case are that the complainant has lodged a report at police station Pulgaon, District Durg alleging that on 07.07.2024, at about 12.30 pm, the applicant lured the victim from her parents’ legal guardianship without their consent with intent to engage in illicit sexual relation. It is alleged that the applicant is accused of dishonestly performing marriage by wearing a mangalsutra and forcibly establishing physical relation with the victim on several occasions constituting rape and aggravative coercive sexual assault. Based on the said complaint, the applicant was arrest. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and the prosecutrix is claimed to be a consenting party having a consensual relationship with the applicant since long. It is submitted that when the applicant refused to marry her, the prosecutrix lodged the complaint. Further, it is submitted that there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and that it is a case of love affair. It is submitted that there is a monetary dispute between the victim’s father and accused leading to false charges. He further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 18.07.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be 3 imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that victim is minor hence, her consent is legally immaterial. 5. Victim and her father appeared through the concerned DLSA and they have objection in granting bail to the applicant. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and this Court finds that there was unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and there was a love affair between them, he is lodged in custody since 18.07.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant has no prior criminal record. The prosecutrix’s contention of being a major consenting party and the applicant’s denial of guilt raise significant disputed questions of fact to be determined at the trial. Considering the above, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of jail. Accordingly, the Accordingly, his bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions: i) He/she shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. ii) He/she shall not make any attempt to tamper 4 with the prosecution witnesses. Iii) the applicant is directed not to communicate/contact in any manner with the prosecutrix, her family members and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet any other person concerned or attempt to ask for any favour in the trial directly or indirectly. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge