1 / 4 2026:CGHC:6013 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 165 of 2026 Pradeep Dhritlhare S/o Vijay Dhritlhare Aged About 22 Years R/o Akaltara, Birjadih, Baloda Bajar, District Baloda Bajar, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Gudhiyari Police Station Raipur, District Raipur,Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aakash Aahuja, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 03.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 390/2025, registered at Police Station – Gudhiyari Police Station Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 74 & 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the Prosecution in brief is that the complainant submitted a written complaint to Gudhiyari Police Station, Raipur, stating that she resides with her husband and children in a rented house in Gudhiyari. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.11 10:32:11 +0530 2 / 4 The applicant/accused, Akhil alias Pradeep, is the nephew of her husband’s friend and was considered a relative by her husband, frequently visiting their home. On 11.08.2025, when her husband was at work, the applicant/accused came to their house around 3:00 PM, and while she was working in the kitchen, he allegedly grabbed her from behind, placed his hands on her waist and chest, and threatened to kill her and her children if she informed anyone. She resisted and the accused then fled. The next day, she informed her cousin, Kailash Sipka, who advised her to tell her husband and file a complaint. Acting on this advice, she and her husband went to the police station, and based on her written complaint, Gudhiyari Police Station, Raipur, registered FIR No. 390/2025 against the applicant/accused under Sections 74 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is no direct or cogent evidence to substantiate the claim that he committed the alleged offence. He asserts that no prima facie case is made out against him under Sections 74 and 351(2) of B.N.S, and that the prosecution’s case is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, with evidence collected during the investigation being insufficient to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The applicant emphasizes that every accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and denial of bail would amount to pre-trial punishment, contrary to the spirit of justice. He undertakes not to tamper with evidence or influence any witnesses, assures the Court of his law- abiding conduct, deep roots in the community, and that there is no risk of absconding. The applicant further assures that he will be available 3 / 4 for trial, comply with all conditions imposed by the Court, and is prepared to furnish adequate surety. He submits that he is the sole breadwinner of his family, and denial of bail would cause undue hardship; moreover, his health requires regular medical attention, which may not be adequately provided in custody. The applicant has no previous criminal record, and any other relevant grounds may be urged at the time of hearing with the leave of the Hon’ble Court, thus he deserves to be granted bail, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant/accused, is alleged to have committed serious offences of physical assault, sexual molestation, and threatening the life of the complainant’s children, as detailed in the FIR, case diary, and the victim’s statement under Section 183 B.N.S. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the need to protect the victim and her family, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as disclosed in the FIR, the case diary, and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S., the applicant/accused is alleged to have committed serious offences involving physical assault, sexual molestation, and threats to the life of the complainant’s children in her residence. The allegations include grabbing the complainant from behind, placing his hands on her waist and chest, and threatening to kill her children, which are grave in nature and fall under Sections 74 4 / 4 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. The documents on record, including the FIR, investigation materials, and the victim’s statement, prima facie indicate the involvement of the applicant/accused in the offence. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the potential risk to the victim and her family, and the necessity to maintain the integrity of the investigation and trial, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant/accused is not entitled to the grant of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Pradeep Dhritlhare, involved in Crime No. 390/2025, registered at Police Station – Gudhiyari Police Station Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 74 & 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav