1 2026:CGHC:23813 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3020 of 2026 Suraj Bhawan S/o Lakhan Lal Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Jhora, Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) ...Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) … Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.06.2026 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. 84/2026 registered at Police Station : Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n), of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 13.03.2026, the prosecutrix lodged written report at Police Station, Katghora, alleging therein that on 11.12.2017 at about 2.00 night, the applicant has committed sexual VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.15 17:46:52 +0530 2 intercourse with the prosecutrix by giving assurances of marriage. Thereafter the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her on many times, due to which, she became pregnant and the applicant administered her tablets for miscarriage of pregnancy and when the prosecutrix asked the applicant for marriage, he has refused to marry with her by saying that his parents would commit suicide if he will perform marriage with her. As the applicant has refused to marry her and he performed marriage with other lady, due to which, the prosecutrix has stop to talk with the applicant. Thereafter in the year 2023, the applicant has again given assurances of marriage and committed sexual intercourse with her, due to which, she again become pregnant, but his pregnancy was miscarried. Thereafter the applicant has again committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix and the prosecutrix has again become pregnant and her pregnancy was miscarried. The applicant has last time committed sexual intercourse with her on 10.12.2025 and now the applicant has refused to marry her. On the basis of above report, the offence U/s 376(2)(n) of IPC has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecutrix is a major lady and, from her own conduct and allegations, it is evident that she was a willing and consenting party. The FIR has been lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay of more than eight years, which casts serious doubt on the prosecution story, especially when no satisfactory explanation for such delay has been furnished. The material on record indicates 3 that the relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix was purely consensual from the very beginning and the physical relationship, if any, was established with the free will and consent of the prosecutrix, without any coercion, undue influence, fear, protest, or duress. The prosecutrix had willingly developed and continued the relationship with the applicant, and at no point did she raise any complaint or objection. Therefore, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the applicant. The applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his continued incarceration is causing severe hardship to his dependents. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 13.03.2026, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel State opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present applicant on the pretext of marriage established physical relationship with the victim and thereafter denied, therefore, 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 the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the victim, who is a major, was in a consensual relationship with the applicant during which a sexual relationship was established, and thereafter, their relationship could not materialize consequently leading to the lodging of the present FIR and the applicant has been in jail since 4 13.03.2026 and that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Suraj Bhawan, involved in Crime No. 84/2026 registered at Police Station : Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n), of the IPC, 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:- (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. (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, 5 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav