1 2026:CGHC:2040 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 374 of 2026 Chandraprakash Beriya S/o. Late Shri Gangaram Aged About 40 Years Caste - Domar, R/o. Phase - 1, Tilhari Jabalpur, Police Station - Gorabazar, District - Jabalpur (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Chirmiri, District - Manendragarh - Bharatpur - Chirmiri (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.01.2026 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. 200/22025 registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District Manedragarh-Bharatpur- Chirmiri (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2) and Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, the victim submitted a written complaint before the I.G. of Police, stating that initially she and the applicant came ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.14 10:53:10 +0530 2 to know each other through Facebook. The applicant told her that he was unmarried and expressed his intention to marry her. At that time, the victim informed him that she was a widowed lady and was living with her 12-year-old son. Thereafter, the victim agreed to marry the applicant, and they solemnized their marriage at Chanwaridand Mandir, Khadgawan, Chirmiri, on 24.07.2024. Thereafter, the applicant lived with the victim at her house at New Tikrapara, Chirmiri, for about one month. Subsequently, he went to Jabalpur and returned to Chirmiri after 4 to 5 months, after which he took the victim and her son to Jabalpur (M.P.). At Jabalpur, the victim came to know that the applicant was already married and had two sons. It is alleged that the applicant did not allow the victim to go anywhere, forcibly established physical relations with her, and made nude videos of her. The victim somehow managed to escape from the applicant and reached Police Station Chirmiri to lodge a report against him. However, the police did not register an FIR at that time, and her report was registered under Section 174 of the BNSS, with advice to approach the Court. Consequently, the victim sent a written complaint to the I.G., Surguja Range, Ambikapur. On the instructions of the I.G., Surguja Range, Police Station Chirmiri registered an FIR under Section 319(2) of the BNS (corresponding to Section 419 of the IPC) and Sections 66(D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 319(2) and 69 of the BNS and Sections 66(D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual love affair developed through Facebook. The victim was residing with the 3 applicant in a live-in relationship at Chirmiri as well as at Jabalpur (M.P.) for a considerable period. The relationship was well known to the public, and people considered the applicant and the victim to be living as husband and wife. He further submits that the applicant is about 40 years of age and never represented himself to the victim as an unmarried person. He also submits that when the applicant came to know about the illicit relationship of the victim with her uncle, he raised objections. Thereafter, in order to convert the issue, the victim pressurized the applicant to obtain a divorce from his legally wedded wife. However, the applicant refused and stated that he was willing to keep the victim along with his wife, which proposal was not acceptable to the victim. He submits that after due deliberation, the victim twisted the facts, gave a criminal colour to a purely personal and matrimonial dispute, and submitted a false written complaint before the I.G., Surguja Range. He submits that when the victim initially approached Police Station Chirmiri and narrated the incident, the police, after due inquiry, did not find the commission of any cognizable offence against the applicant. The police found that the dispute between the applicant and the victim was purely of a family and personal nature. Accordingly, no FIR was registered, and her grievance was recorded under Section 174 of the BNSS for a non- cognizable offence, with advice to approach the competent Court for redressal. He submits that no obscene photograph or video of the victim has been seized from the possession of the applicant during the investigation. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 07.10.2025, the conclusion of the trial may take some more 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 4 the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that the applicant/accused was in a relationship with the victim by portraying himself as an unmarried man and, on that pretext, committed sexual intercourse with her, whereas in fact the applicant is a married man having two major children. Therefore, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to the 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 and upon perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it appears that both the applicant and the victim were in a consensual relationship. The victim is a widowed woman, whereas the applicant is a married person, and they had established a sexual relationship. Thereafter, the relationship could not materialize, and consequently, the present FIR came to be lodged by the victim. Further considering that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court, that the applicant has been in jail since 07.10.2025, and that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Chandraprakash Beriya, involved in Crime No. 200/22025 registered at Police Station : Chirmiri, District Manedragarh- Bharatpur-Chirmiri (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2) and Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 5 (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 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 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 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