1 2026:CGHC:372 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9823 of 2025 Rajani Yadav W/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 35 Years R/o Bijli Nagar Colony, Bhilai- 03, District : Durg, Chhattisgar ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Purani Bhilai (Bhilai-3), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amiyakant Tiwari , Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.01.2026 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. 292/2025, registered at Police Station – Purani Bhilai (Bhilai-3) District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.06 10:38:21 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 01.08.2025 informant Parakh Banjare lodged report against the present applicant that he was working as guard under the employment of A.P.S. Company situated in CSPTCL colony Bhilai-3 during 2020 to July 2025. It is further stated that he was residing in a house provided by the company in the same colony with Ashish Sahu and Toman Lal Nishad, the applicant herein was also residing in the same locality along with 2 minor children and use to visit his residence and use to come with Tiffin. It is further alleged that in the month of March 2025 the applicant came with the tiffin and after having tiffin the informant became unconscious and when came to senses he saw that the applicant is recordingvideo in her mobile phone and demanded money of Rs. 5,00,000/- in lieu of deleting the video. It is further stated that on 17.05.2025 he return to his village Nipani District Balod but the present applicant regularly threatening him and demanding money. It is further stated that on 26.07.2025 he has paid an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- which was taken on loan mortgaging, his agricultural land. It is also alleged that the applicant even after taking money regularly black mailing and demanding balance amount. On receiving above mentioned report the local police had registered the present crime against the present applicant and on 07.08.2025 the applicant was arrested and since then she was in custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. no offence under the alleged sections is made out against her and there is no legal material or evidence available on record to 3 substantiate the allegations. It is further submitted that the FIR is delayed without any plausible explanation, thereby raising serious doubt and making false implication a distinct possibility. The applicant also submits that on the complaint of minor children, an offence under Section 67 of the I.T. Act, Section 12 of the POCSO Act and Sections 75, 79 and 3(5) of the BNS was directed to be registered against the informant in the present case by the learned 4th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Durg (F.T.C.) POCSO Act, in M.J.C. No. 85/2025, and that the present case is triable by a Magistrate of First Class, wherein the prosecution is yet to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, which will take considerable time. The investigation has already been completed and there is no possibility of tampering with evidence. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title of the bail application and there is no likelihood of her absconding or influencing the prosecution witnesses. She is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all directions and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, and the applicant has one criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the 4 nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and further taking into account that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has in judicial custody since 07.08.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Rajani Yadav, involved in Crime No. 292/2025, registered at Police Station – Purani Bhilai (Bhilai-3) District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the BNS., be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum 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 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 sufficient 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (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 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav