1 2025:CGHC:53428 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1668 of 2025 • Umesh Tirkey S/o Chhotan Ram Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Ghorgadi, P.O. Sewari, P.S. Rajpur, District - Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Ms. I. Lakra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.10.2025 1. This is a Second anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.208/2025 registered at Police Station – Rajpur, District – Balrampur Ramanujgaj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 351(3) of BNS. 2. The first anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRCA No.1491 of 2025 vide order dated 24.09.2025 on technical ground. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.03 17:42:24 +0530 2 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant namely Pushpanjali Kujur appeared before the P.S. Rajpur on dtd.03/09/2025 and stated that through Face book she came across the applicant in the month August 2024 ever since both were in contact. On 15/09/2024 the applicant had come to Lakhanpur, the place of the complainant to appear for the Hostel warden exam. Then along with the applicant the complainant went to his house at Vill. Ghorgadi. Where the applicant told the complainant that he is married and has two sons and is separated from his wife through TALAK. Knowing every thing the complainant was ready to adjust with things and promising to get married both made physical contact and established sexual relationship. There after both continued to meet each other and had physical relationships with consent. Later the complainant started to force the applicant to give her money for different needs and several times she had been provided with it. She demanded to buy land in her name where she wanted to construct house. Being very high price the applicant needed to wait for some time to arrange for money which upset the complainant. Now she is not ready to get married saying that the applicant has grownup sons and registered the alleged FIR against the applicant. The intention of the complainant is only to extract money from the applicant, on the basis of said complaint, FIR has been registered against the present applicant. Hence, this application. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that the prosecutrix is a major girl aged about 28 years old and she was in contact with the applicant through Facebook since the month of August 2024 and thereafter, both continued to 3 meet each other and had physical relationships with consent. Later the prosecutrix started to force the applicant to give her money for different needs and several times she had been provided with it by the applicant. She further submits that the intention of the complainant is only to extort money from the applicant and did not married with the applicant and lodged FIR against present applicant. She further argued that the prosecutrix is a habitual offender, as previously also she extorted money from innocent person and the copy of FIR of the incident of similar nature has also been annexed herewith as Annexure-A/5. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that prosecutrix is in a habit of extorting money from innocent person and falsely implicated them by blackmailing and copy of FIR of the incident of similar nature has also been annexed herewith as Annexure-A/5., at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Umesh Tirkey on executing a 4 personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant 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 their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali