1 2026:CGHC:4746 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 922 of 2026 Deepak Nishad S/o Kailash Nishad Aged About 22 Years R/o Dudhipali, Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O-cer, Police Of Police Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.01.2026 1. This is the First bail application 4led 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. 389/2025 registered at Police Station : Basna, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the case arises out of a long- standing consensual relationship between the applicant and the victim, who were in a live-in relationship for about 4ve years. Out of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 the said relationship, a child was born, who was subsequently given in lawful adoption with the written consent of the victim. Thereafter, due to personal di;erences, the relationship between the parties came to an end. It is the speci4c case of the applicant that after the breakup, the victim raised an illegal demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- and exerted pressure upon the applicant to marry her within her caste, and upon his inability and refusal to accede to such demand, she threatened him with false implication in a rape case. It is further submitted that despite no cognizable o;ence having been made out, the Applicant was illegally detained by the police from 24.09.2025 to 27.09.2025 without following due process of law, and only thereafter the present FIR was registered. The allegations levelled in the FIR are an afterthought, false, motivated and instituted with an ulterior motive of vengeance and monetary gain. Hence, the present bail application has been 4led. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant and the victim were in a long- standing consensual love relationship for about 4ve years and were living together in a live-in relationship out of their own free will, both being major, and therefore the allegations do not prima facie constitute the o;ence of rape. It is further submitted that out of the said relationship a child was born, who, with the written consent of the victim, was lawfully given in adoption, which clearly belies the allegation of any forcible sexual relationship. It is contended that after the relationship ended, the victim pressurized the applicant to 3 marry her within her caste and further raised an illegal demand of Rs. 5,00,000/-, and upon the applicant’s inability to ful4ll such demand, she threatened him with false implication and thereafter lodged the present false complaint. It is further submitted that the applicant was illegally detained by the police from 24.09.2025 to 27.09.2025 without following due process of law and only thereafter the FIR was registered, which seriously dents the credibility of the prosecution case. There is unexplained delay and material contradictions in the version of the victim, clearly indicating that the complaint is an afterthought and an abuse of the process of law. The Applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been 4led, he is in jail since 28.09.2025, his continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose, and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are serious in nature and disclose commission of cognizable o;ences. It is contended that the victim has consistently alleged that the applicant established physical relations with her on the false promise of marriage and thereafter refused to marry her, resulting in grave mental and physical exploitation. She also submits that the FIR and statements recorded during investigation prima facie support the prosecution case, and the plea 4 of consensual relationship is a matter of trial which cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of bail. It is further submitted that the delay, if any, has been su-ciently explained and does not dilute the gravity of the o;ence. Considering the nature of allegations, the vulnerability of the victim and the likelihood of the applicant inBuencing witnesses, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 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 of allegations, the material available on record, and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court 4nds that the relationship between the applicant and the victim was admittedly long-standing and consensual in nature, and that the parties were living together in a live-in relationship for several years. It is also noted that a child was born out of the said relationship and was subsequently given in lawful adoption with the consent of the victim. Further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant is in jail since 28.09.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Deepak Nishad, involved in Crime No. 389/2025 registered at Police Station : Basna, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) 5 for the o;ence punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 4le an undertaking to the e;ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4xed 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 4xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su-cient 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 4xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, 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 4xed for (i) opening 6 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 su-cient 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. O-ce is directed to send a certi4ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan