1 2026:CGHC:17901 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 580 of 2026 1 - Radheshyam Sahu S/o Puniram Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o Majha Para Silyari, District-Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Mahila Thana, Raigarh, District-Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Hardik Jaiswal, Advocate and Mr. Ankush Borkar, Advocate For State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.04.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.13/2026 registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, Raigarh District Raigarh, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 75(2), 115(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. In brief, the prosecution case is that after the death of the victim’s father in the year of 2020, the applicant, Radheshyam Sahu, who had allegedly been in an illicit relationship with the victim’s mother ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA Date: 2026.04.22 11:29:30 +0530 2 and frequently visiting their house for several years, began behaving inappropriately with the victim. It is alleged that from November 2025 onwards, whenever he found the victim alone, he would touch her inappropriately with ill intention. Despite the victim informing her mother, no action was taken. On 02.12.2025, the applicant allegedly entered the victim’s room, molested her, from which she is able to escape. It is further alleged that such acts continued throughout December 2025, and the victim’s mother not only failed to intervene but also threatened her. Ultimately, distressed by the continued harassment, the victim lodged a complaint at Mahila Thana, Raigarh. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case, as the allegations levelled in the FIR are vague, general, and omnibus in nature, without attributing any specific overt act to him. The applicant is aged about 52 years and has categorically denied any involvement in the alleged offence and submits that he is a small-scale businessman of clean antecedents, being maliciously targeted. It is further submitted that the victim was in the habit of frequently leaving home and associating with various individuals, and upon being restrained by her mother, she had threatened to implicate the family members, including the present applicant, in false cases. The applicant, who is friend of victim’s father, had merely advised her in good faith and informed her mother regarding her conduct, which led to animosity and the 3 filing of the present false complaint. It is also submitted that the victim has also lodged an FIR against her mother. The applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his detention would cause irreparable financial and mental hardship to his dependents. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause-title and there is no likelihood of his absconding, he undertakes to fully cooperate with the investigation and abide by all conditions imposed by this Court. The FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay, casting serious doubt on the genuineness of the prosecution story. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non - applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, also considering the fact that allegations levelled against the present applicant are primarily based on general and omnibus assertions, and the matter appears to rest substantially on the statements of the prosecutrix, which would be subject to appreciation during trial. Furthermore, the investigation is at a preliminary stage, and no specific circumstances have been brought on record by the prosecution, without commenting on the merits of the case, this 4 Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Radheshyam Sahu, on executing a personal bond and 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 along with a coloured 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 himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saxena