1 2025:CGHC:42458 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5972 of 2025 Dhansai Jangde @ Vikram Premi S/o Chaitram Jangde, Aged About 30 Years R/o Mudwabhata, P.S. Koshir, District Sarangarh Chhattisgarh At Present Wrs Colony, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur (Wrongly Mentioned As Sarkanda In Annexure A-1), District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.08.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 210/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on the that during the period from 16.07.2024 to 10.10.2024, the applicant/accused, on the pretext of marriage the applicant, forcibly established physical relations with her several times and, by giving her false assurance of providing employment, deceitfully obtained a total sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from her on different occasions. During investigation, after registering the offences under Sections 69 and 318(4) of the BNS, a charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant was arrested on 28.02.2025. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has neither committed any sexual offence nor taken any money from the victim as alleged. The victim was well aware that the applicant is a married person and had met his family members, hence, there was no deception on his part. The applicant, who was working as a Loan Officer at IDFC Bank, never demanded or accepted any amount in the name of providing a job. Although the victim had proposed marriage, the applicant refused as he was already married, and therefore, she has lodged a false complaint. The victim, being a 30-year-old major, is well aware of right and wrong, and without her consent, commission of such offences is not possible. Hence, the allegations are false and fabricated. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its 3 conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that on the pretext of marriage the applicant, forcibly established physical relations with the victim on several times and, by giving her false assurance of providing employment, deceitfully obtained a total sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from her, further the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the year 2023 under the IPC, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that it prima facie appears that the on the pretext of marriage, the applicant forcibly established physical relations with the victim on several times and, by giving her false assurance of providing employment, deceitfully obtained a total sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from her and the said fact is also corroborated from the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents, which are of the year 2023 and are identical in nature, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to 4 enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Dhansai Jangde @ Vikram Premi, involved in Crime No. 210/2025, registered at Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 318(4) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal