1 2026:CGHC:21645 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4255 of 2026 Rishabh Singh Chauhan @ Somu S/o Ghanshyam Singh Chauhan, Aged About 30 Years R/o Gandhi Chowk, Purani Basti Konta, P.S. Konta District- Sukma (C.G.) Present Address Dharampura, No. 1, Atal Bihari Vajpayee Ward Jagdalpur, P.S. Kotwali District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Bodhghat Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan , Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/05/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 57/2026 registered at Police Station Bodhghat, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75, 78, 296, 126(2), 79 of B.N.S. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the victim lodged an F.I.R. on 12.02.2026 against the present applicant alleging that the applicant KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 abused her, wrongfully restrained her by holding her hand and pulling her and also touched her chest with the intention of outraging her modesty. The police arrested the applicant and filed the charge-sheet before the competent with the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated by the concerned Police Station and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the victim used to demand money from the applicant for her unlawful demands and when the applicant refused to fulfil the same, she lodged the present F.I.R. against him. In support of the said contention, the applicant has filed his bank statements showing that certain amounts were transferred to the account of the victim through PhonePe, which are annexed herewith as Annexure A-2. He further submits that the victim and her family members are misusing the legal process in order to harass the applicant after their relationship turned sour. It is also submitted that the medical report does not support the case of the prosecution and that the F.I.R. has been lodged with delay without assigning any sufÏcient reason. He further submits that the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude and the applicant is presently lodged in jail. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that there are specific allegations against the present applicant regarding outraging the modesty of the victim and considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the applicant 3 is not entitled to be released on bail. It is further submitted that the statements of the victim and other prosecution witnesses duly support the case of the prosecution and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, period of detention of the applicant and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, coupled with the fact that certain amounts were transferred by the applicant to the account of the victim through PhonePe and, upon refusal of the applicant to further fulfil her demands, the present F.I.R. appears to have been lodged against him and further considering the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. as well as the medical report, this Court is of the view that further pre-trial detention of the applicant is not warranted. Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Rishabh Singh Chauhan @ Somu, involved in Crime No. 57/2026 registered at Police Station Bodhghat, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75, 78, 296, 126(2), 79 of B.N.S, be released on bail 4 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 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal