1 2026:CGHC:5598 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 199 of 2026 • Arvind Paikara S/o Durga Paikara , Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Jigniya, P.S. And Tehsil Kusmi, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kusmi, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Abhinav Dubey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31/01/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.79/2025 registered at Police Station Kusmi, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 331(4) of BNS, 2023. 2. As Per the Prosecution Story, that on 03.09.2025, when the brother-in-law (Jija) of the prosecutrix had visited her house to celebrate Karma Festival, he was accompanied by the accused VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.02.02 18:19:33 +0530 2 Arvind Paikara. Later at night, when all the family members went to sleep after dinner, her brother-in-law asked his friend/accused Arvind to wake up and leave for the festival, but he refused to go and continued sleeping. Then at midnight, around 3 a.m. accused Arvind woke up and asked for tobacco from her father-in-law and after that when her father-in-law went into deep sleep, accused Arvind entered her room and when she asked who it is, he uncovered the mosquito net and committed the sexual offence. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation levelled against the applicant is totally baseless and as per doctor opinion, there is no any sign of recent forceful intercourse and also there was no injury found on the body of prosecutrix. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. She further submits that looking to the conduct of the applicant, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and as per MLC report, there is no any sign of recent forceful intercourse and also there was no injury found on the body of prosecutrix. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2025 and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant – Arvind Paikra, involved in Crime No. 79/2025 registered at Police Station Kusmi, District-Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 331(4) of BNS, 2023, be released on bail on their 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 sufficient 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali