1 2025:CGHC:9159 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1478 of 2025 Santosh Ram S/o Late Ramjan Ram Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Madachak, P.S. Gopalpur, District Gopal Ganj (Bihar). Presently R/o Village Ghoghapani, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Ganj, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.327/2024, registered at Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 296, 115(2) and 351(2) of the BNS. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.02.21 15:57:11 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in a nutshell is that a written complaint was made by the prosecutrix/complainant before the P.S. Ganj by stating that she is aged about 35 years who is residing separately from her husband and through matrimonial app she came in contact with the present applicant. That thereafter they were in regular contact through mobile phone and when applicant showed his desire for marriage with the prosecutrix then both came Raipur for marriage and thereafter on the pretext of marriage present applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the complainant and refused for marriage and has also physically assaulted her. That on the basis of complainant investigation was started by the concerning police and during investigation, present applicant has been arrested for the offences punishable under section 69, 296, 115(2) & 351(2) of B.N.S. After completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed before the jurisdictional magistrate. Hence the instant bail application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence. He further submits that there is huge delay in lodging the complaint, which has not been properly explained. Also, the prosecutrix is major girl aged about more than 35 years and as per the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, she herself has admitted regarding consensual sexual intercourse by the applicant. The prosecutrix is educated girl, knowing all her good and bads, even then merely due to some dispute if relationship ends, same would not amount to offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. As per the MLC the concerning 3 doctor has stated about 'no definite opinion can be given regarding sexual intercourse'. When the family members came to know about the relationship of the complainant and applicant, then the entire story has been created and the present applicant has been falsely implicated, whereas the relationship was consensual. The charge sheet has already been filed on 16.10.2024 before the court concerned and applicant is languishing in jail since 16.10.2024 and trial is likely to take some time. Hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant. 5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that prosecutrix is major women aged about more than 35 years and as per the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, she herself has admitted regarding consensual sexual intercourse with the applicant, charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.10.2025 hence, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 6. 6. Let applicant, Santosh Ram, involved in Crime No.327/2024, registered at Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 296, 115(2) and 351(2) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 5 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. 7. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet