1 2026:CGHC:26924 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1776 of 2026 Manish Guldasani S/o Late Shri Ashok Guldasani Aged About 28 Years R/o Village- Rajaram Colony, Ahead Of Arihant Vihar, Vidisha, P S. Civil Lines, Vidisha, M.P. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S H O) P.S. Saraswati Nagar, Dist. Raipur C.G. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from case information system) For Applicant : Shri Devershi Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, PL. For complainant : Shri Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/07/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.201/2021 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 363(2)(k)(n), GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.07.02 14:58:42 +0530 2 377, 506 Part II of IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the victim made a complaint before the Police of Police Station- Saraswati Nagar, Distt. Raipur alleging therein that the applicant had committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage. Hence, this FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 28/04/2025 vide MCRC No.1944/2025. It is submitted that the applicant was earlier granted bail by the trial Court, but due to his non-appearance, an arrest warrant was issued and he was re-arrested on 03.03.2025. It is further submitted that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 7 have already been examined, including the victim, and no witness has been examined after the applicant's re-arrest, resulting in delay in the trial. It is further argued that the victim is a major and was competent to give consent. It is also submitted that she had lodged another FIR against the applicant arising out of the same relationship, which, according to the defence, indicates that the dispute is personal in nature. It is contended that the applicant is 28 years of age, he is in custody since 03.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take time; therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as also learned counsel for the complainant oppose prayer for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials 3 available on record. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 28/04/2025 vide MCRC No.1944/2025. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the victim has already been examined before the trial Court, 7 out of 12 prosecution witnesses have been examined, the applicant is in custody since 03.03.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicant- Manish Guldasani, involved in Crime No.201/2021 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 363(2)(k)(n), 377, 506 Part II of IPC, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy 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. 4 (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 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri