1 2025:CGHC:7070 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1146 of 2025 Sandeep Verma S/o Ramesh Verma Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Rengakathera, Police Outpost Jalbandha, Police Station Khairagarh, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O., Police Outpost Jalbandha, Police Station Khairagarh, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.02.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 402/2024 registered at Police Station : Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. According to the prosecution's story, on 17.10.2024, the victim ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.02.07 18:52:28 +0530 2 lodged a written complaint against the applicant. She alleged that while studying in Class 12, she became acquainted with the applicant and began communicating with him via mobile phone. From 03.10.2022, onwards, a physical relationship was established between them, allegedly on the pretext of marriage. In 2023, the victim proposed marriage to the applicant, but her proposal was rejected. It is further alleged that on 11.10.2024, the applicant again established a physical relationship with her. When the victim reiterated her request for marriage, the applicant ultimately refused. An FIR was registered against the applicant for an offense punishable under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the victim is a 20 years old major girl and they were in a consensual relationship. He further submits the victim was a consenting party. He further submits that the present applicant has been in jail since 22.10.2024 and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that the present applicant/accused on the pretext marriage committed sexually intercourse with the victim, and thereafter denied, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular 3 bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case and from perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it appears that the victim who is aged about 20 years and the present applicant were in a consensual relationship and they established sexual relationship, thereafter, their relationship could not be materialize, consequently, the present FIR has been lodged by the victim on the ground that the present applicant refused to marry her. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 22.10.2024 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Sandeep Verma, involved in Crime No. 402/2024 registered at Police Station : Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4 fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 5 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek