1 2025:CGHC:61549 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1970 of 2025 Arvind Kumar Mendhe S/o Late M.D. Mendhe Aged About 45 Years R/o Indira Nagar, Post B M Y Charoda, P S Old Bhilai, Distt. - Durg Chhattisgarh 490025 ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Old Bhilai, District - Durg Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 17.12.2025 1. 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. 0457/2025 registered at Police Station – Old Bhilai District - Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(a)(i) of BNS 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the victim aged about 35 years VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.17 15:38:41 +0530 2 alleges that the applicant who is in police said to her that he would get released her son who is in jail in connection with offence punishable under POCSO Act and by saying so the applicant started saying to her for physical relationship and that he used to call her by phone frequently and asked her to meet him and on 18.11.2025 at about 06:10 the applicant called her to police station and female police took her signature on some paper and thereafter applicant called her by phone and asked her to come to Charoda Bus stand where she went by auto rikshaw and thereafter he took her to a lonely jungle area on his vehicle and pressurized her for physical relationship and thereafter he hugged her and touched her private part and when she told him that she is under going menses then he dropped her saying that to meet him after two days. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, the alleged incident is said to have occurred on 18.11.2025 at 6:10 PM, whereas the FIR was lodged on 19.11.2025 at 6:02 PM, with a delay of about 24 hours, allegedly to obtain family suggestions. The FIR invokes Section 64(2)(a)(i) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which prescribes rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than ten years or up to life imprisonment; however, to attract this provision, the commission of rape as defined under Section 63 of BNS 2023 must exist, which is absent from the contents of the FIR. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is a permanent resident at the address mentioned in the cause title, where his movable and immovable property is situated, so there is no likelihood of 3 absconding. The applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety and undertake to abide by all directions and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting anticipatory bail., therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the allegations made by the victim, aged about 35 years, disclose serious misconduct on the part of the applicant, who is a police personnel. It is alleged that the applicant misused his official position by assuring the victim that he would secure the release of her son, who is in jail in connection with an offence under the POCSO Act, and on that pretext induced her to commit a physical relationship, therefore he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory 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 and gravity of the offence, and upon perusal of the material available on record, including the case diary, the allegations made by the victim, who is aged about 35 years, prima facie disclose serious misconduct on the part of the applicant, who is a police personnel. It is further alleged that the applicant misused his official position by assuring the victim that he would secure the release of her son, who is in jail in connection with an offence under the POCSO Act, and on that pretext induced her to submit to a physical relationship. The allegations, on the face of the record, reflect an abuse of authority and exploitation of 4 the victim’s vulnerable position. Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the status of the applicant as a police officer, and the reasonable apprehension that he may influence the victim or hamper the investigation, if granted the relief sought, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Arvind Kumar Mendhe, involved in Crime No. 0457/2025 registered at Police Station – Old Bhilai District - Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(a)(i) of BNS 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav