1 2026:CGHC:26582 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 966 of 2026 Arun Gritlahare S/o Vijay Gritlahare Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Kalmidih, Police Station And Tehsil- Bhatapara And, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The S. H. O. Police Station- Gurur, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer For Complainant/Objector : Ms. Pranoti Das, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2026 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the default which has been pointed out by the Registry of this Court is cured. 2. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 18/2026 registered at Police Station – Hathbandh, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64 of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhtia, 2023, and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 3. As per the prosecution story, in brief, it is alleged that on 11.01.2026 at about 10:00 a.m., the victim had gone to the house of her neighbour, Mona Ghritlahare, where the present applicant, Arun, who is stated to be a relative of Mona Ghritlahare, was also present. It is alleged that upon seeing the victim, the applicant called her inside a room and, after expressing that he loved her, attempted to establish physical relations with her. When the victim refused and objected, the applicant allegedly assured her that he would always keep her with him and thereafter forcibly established physical relations with her against her will. It is further alleged that after the incident, the victim returned home and narrated the entire incident to her parents. On the basis of the written complaint lodged by the victim, Police Station Hathbandh registered Crime No. 18/2026 against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and took up the investigation. Apprehending his arrest in connection with the aforesaid crime, the applicant has preferred the present application seeking grant of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. It is contended that the applicant has no role whatsoever in the alleged incident and that the 3 prosecution case has been instituted on account of a pre-existing dispute and family enmity between the families of the applicant and the victim. He further submits that the FIR was lodged on the very same day of the alleged incident and the victim was medically examined immediately thereafter, however, the medical examination does not support the prosecution case, as no external or internal injuries or any signs suggestive of forcible sexual assault were found on her person, which creates serious doubt regarding the veracity of the allegations. It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to the existing family dispute and enmity. It is further submitted that the victim has no objection regarding the granting of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. Therefore he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant is accused of committing a grave and heinous offence punishable under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. It is contended that the allegations made by the victim are specific, cogent and prima facie supported by the material collected during the course of investigation. Merely because the medical examination does not reveal external or internal injuries, the same is not sufficient to discredit the prosecution case at this stage, particularly in cases involving sexual offences. Therefore, 4 considering the gravity of the allegations and the material collected during investigation, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant appeared and expressed no objection before this Court regarding the granting of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the medical examination report of the victim, which, prima facie, does not indicate any external or internal injuries suggestive of forcible sexual assault, and the contention of the applicant that the prosecution has been initiated on account of a pre-existing family dispute, and further the fact that learned counsel appearing for the complainant has fairly stated that he has no objection if the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail. In the facts of the present case, the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary at this stage. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Arun Gritlahare, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of 5 the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of her adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan