1 2026:CGHC:7108 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 206 of 2026 • Vikram Yadav Son Of Jogender Yadav Aged About 27 Years Resident Of Village Kera Road Bhathapara, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/02/2026 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.985/2025 registered at Police Station – Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(M) and 69 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix made written complaint stating therein that she was working as VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.02.10 17:27:13 +0530 2 Receptionist in the Mayank Hotel and on the year 2023, he got admission in the College and on 26.01.2024, first time the prosecutrix met with the applicant and thereafter both of them talk to each other got love affair between them and on 22.02.2024 at about 4.00 a.m. during the morning walk, the applicant made sexual relation with the prosecutrix and thereafter the applicant made intercourse with her many times, but when the prosecutrix got pregnant, the applicant refused the marriage with her. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the prosecutrix is a major woman. Learned counsel submits that there was a consensual relationship of about two years between the prosecutrix and the applicant, during which they had physical relations. As a result of the said relationship, the prosecutrix became pregnant, and it is asserted that she was a consenting party throughout. It is further argued that the investigation and trial are likely to take considerable time and, therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. Although the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the material on record does not entitle him to the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that, as per the statement of the victim recorded 3 under Section 183 of the BNSS, the prosecutrix was in contact with the applicant since the year 2023, during which time they developed a love relationship. On 22.02.2024, at about 4:00 a.m., during a morning walk, the applicant allegedly established sexual relations with the prosecutrix and thereafter continued to have intercourse with her on multiple occasions. It is further submitted that when the prosecutrix became pregnant, the applicant refused to marry her, following which the prosecutrix consumed rat poison. In view of these circumstances, learned State counsel submits that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS by the prosecutrix/victim, she is major girl and the fact that present applicant and the victim were in a relationship and she was a consenting party, investigation and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Vikram Yadav, on executing a personal bond with 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 4 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 alongwith a colored 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 vaishali