1 2026:CGHC:9528 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 573 of 2026 Rajkumar Chouhan S/o Ram Ekbal Chouhan Aged About 33 Years R/o Ghasidas Nagar, Nearby Police Station Jamul, District Durg (C.G.) At Present Residing At Jail Prahari, Central Jail Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police of Police Station Manipur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 306/2025, registered at Police Station Manipur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 78, 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, the FIR was lodged by the victim, wherein it has been alleged that the applicant continuously harassed and threatened her to withdraw the earlier case. It is further ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.25 11:16:23 +0530 2 alleged that the applicant used to chase her, and on 05.11.2025, when the victim was going to college, the applicant followed her and caught hold of her hand. Thereafter, the victim entered the college premises. It is also alleged that on 06.11.2025, the applicant went to the shop of the victim’s father and threatened her, and that he continued to threaten the victim on one pretext or another. On the basis of the written report lodged by the victim, the police registered the aforesaid crime and filed the charge sheet against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. It is pertinent to mention here that the true facts are that the applicant used to consume liquor in front of the victim’s house, on account of which FIRs were lodged from time to time either by the victim or by her family members, as disputes would arise between the applicant and the victim’s family members whenever the applicant consumed liquor there. He also submits that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents under the IPC which has already been explained in the present bail application. He submits that the applicant has been in jail since 13.11.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 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 before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further from perusal of the order-sheet dated 3 31.01.2026, the bail application was earlier adjourned to the last week of February 2026 in view of the period of detention, and also that the charge sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in custody since 13.11.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the applicant – Rajkumar Chouhan, involved in Crime No. 306/2025, registered at Police Station Manipur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 78, 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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:- (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 his 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 4 proceedings against his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the 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 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek