1 2026:CGHC:22584 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4476 of 2026 Animesh Minj S/o Johku Minj Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Bariyon (Parsapara) Police Outpost Bariyon, P.S. Rajpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Rajpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rahul Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 55/2026, registered at Police Station 2 Rajpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 332(B), 64(1), 115(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the victim, a widow residing alone in her house, submitted a written complaint on 12.03.2026 before the In-charge of Bariyon Outpost alleging that in the intervening night of 01.03.2026 and 02.03.2026 at about 1:00 A.M., the applicant/accused Animesh Minj, who belongs to her village, broke the bricks of the wall of her house and trespassed into her home by scaling the wall. It is alleged that the accused committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. When she attempted to raise alarm, the accused allegedly pressed her mouth and neck, assaulted her by fists and kicks, and threatened to kill her. On the basis of the said complaint, an offence bearing Crime No. 55/2026 was registered against the applicant/accused at Police Station Rajpur for the offences punishable under Sections 332(b), 64(1), 115(2) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. After investigation, finding sufficient material against the applicant/accused, charge-sheet came to be filed against him under the aforesaid sections. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the victim is a 55 year old lady belonging to the same community as that of the present applicant and there has been a 3 long-standing dispute with regard to land between the parties. He also submits that due to the said previous enmity and strained relations arising out of the land dispute, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present offence with an ulterior motive to exert pressure upon him. The applicant is in jail since 12.03.2026 and charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the allegation against the applicant is that during the intervening night of 01.03.2026 and 02.03.2026, he allegedly broke the wall of the victim’s house, forcibly entered her residence, committed rape upon the widow victim, assaulted her, and threatened to kill her when she tried to raise alarm, the alleged allegation against the applicant is corroborated by the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that during the intervening night of 01.03.2026 and 02.03.2026, the applicant allegedly broke the wall of the victim’s house, forcibly entered her 4 residence, committed rape upon the 50 years old widow lady/victim, assaulted her, and threatened to kill her when she tried to raise alarm, further the contention raised by counsel for the applicant that on account of long-standing dispute related to land between them, the present applicant has been falsely implicated, does not appear to be substantiated by any documentary evidence, only a vague averment has been made regarding the same in para 6.2 of the bail application, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Animesh Minj, involved in Crime No. 55/2026, registered at Police Station Rajpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 332(B), 64(1), 115(2), 351(2) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil