1 2026:CGHC:24755 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5329 of 2026 • Panchram Tandon S/o Late Ram Prasad Tandan, Aged About 45 Years R/o Madhaipur, Police Station Kharora Dist - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kharora, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Smita Jha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 62/2026, registered at Police Station – Kharora, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 127(1), 64(2) and 64(2)(f) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on a complaint by the Complainant victim at Kharora Police Station on 28.01.2026 against the present applicant who is her father in law that her second VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.06.19 19:46:20 +0530 2 marriage solemnized on 03.02.25 and reside in her matrimonial house with joint family. Again she stated that on 23.01.26 when victim rest in her room present applicant committed Force fully physical relation but report lodged after 5 days. On the basis of the information report was lodged against the present applicant registered under the crime no. 62/2026 punishable offense u/s 127(2),64 (1),64(2)(f) of BNS 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She further submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the victim and that the victim was married to the applicant's son in her second marriage. Owing to certain property disputes among the family members, the victim has levelled false allegations against the applicant. It is further submitted that, as per the MLC report, no internal or external injuries were found on the body of the victim. Learned counsel also submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant is in judicial custody since 29.01.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and 3 submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, also considering the fact that the applicant is the father-in-law of the victim and has alleged false implication on account of family and property disputes, coupled with the submission that no internal or external injuries were found on the body of the victim as per the MLC report, this Court is of the view that the matter requires appreciation of evidence during trial. Further, the charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. The applicant is in judicial custody since 29.01.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, therefore, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Panchram Tandon involved in Crime No.62/2026, registered at Police Station – Kharora, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 127(1), 64(2) and 64(2)(f) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail 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 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 4 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. Office 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 vaishali