1 2026:CGHC:27435 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1011 of 2026 Sandeep Meravi S/o- Shri Chetan Singh Meravi, Aged About 30 Years R/o- Village Bandaniya, P.S. And Tehsil- Birsa, District-Balaghat, Madhya Pradedh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through -Station House Officer, Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.07.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 439/2026 registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant/victim lodged a complaint alleging that she and the applicant are distant family friends and have been acquainted with each other for a long time. She alleged that the applicant used to persuade her on the false pretext of marriage by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.03 17:27:44 +0530 2 professing his love and assuring her that he would marry her. She further alleged that on 17.11.2023, the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her on the false promise of marriage and, thereafter, continued to have sexual intercourse with her on several occasions. She further alleged that on 26.10.2025, the applicant again had sexual intercourse with her and, on that occasion, refused to marry her. It is further alleged that the applicant was residing with his sister and used to regularly visit the library where he met the complainant/victim. The applicant repeatedly assured the complainant/victim that he would marry her. However, when the complainant/victim finally asked the applicant to marry her on 25.11.2025, he deserted her and thereafter stopped communicating with her. The complainant/victim then went to the applicant’s house, where she had a confrontation with his family members. Thereafter, the complainant/victim approached Birsa Police Station, where both families settled their dispute. Subsequently, the applicant filed an application on 18.12.2025 before the Upper Collector, Baihar, seeking permission/registration for marriage and also transferred Rs. 5,000/- towards legal expenses relating to the marriage. She alleged that, after filing the said application, the applicant again deserted her and failed to appear in the marriage proceedings. According to the complainant/victim, on 06.02.2026, the applicant completely abandoned her. She further alleged that she subsequently came to know that the applicant had filed an application before the Upper Collector seeking withdrawal of the proposed marriage and had raised objections to the marriage proceedings. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the complainant/victim alleged that the applicant, on the false promise of marriage, committed forcible sexual intercourse with her without her free 3 and voluntary consent. Based on these allegations, the present FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the complainant/victim was already acquainted with the applicant as well as his family members. She has also stated that she does not want to proceed against the applicant and is not willing to pursue any complaint against the applicant or his family members. The present applicant has also submitted a complaint before the concerned police authorities regarding his false implication in the present case. He also further submits that the complainant had herself persuaded the applicant to marry her and had also submitted her bio-data to the applicant’s family members. However, despite the same, the present complaint has been lodged only with the intention of falsely implicating the applicant. It was the applicant who had filed an application for solemnization of marriage before the Upper Collector, Baihar, which clearly establishes that the applicant genuinely intended to marry the complainant/victim. However, due to certain petty disputes, the complainant/victim lodged the present FIR only to harass the applicant and his family members. He submits that the applicant never induced or allured the complainant on the false pretext of marriage. The allegation of committing sexual intercourse on the false pretext of marriage is false and baseless. The applicant and the complainant/victim were well acquainted with each other and intended to marry, for which they had also submitted a joint application before the competent authority. He further submits that the complainant/victim is a major woman who intended to marry the applicant. Even if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at their face value, the same are baseless, as both parties were well acquainted with each other and intended to marry. 4 The applicant never lured the complainant with a false promise of marriage, and the physical relationship between the parties was entirely consensual. It is only due to subsequent disputes between the parties that the present FIR has been lodged. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents, therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submits that the applicant engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim under the pretext of marriage, and thereafter, denied, therefore the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case and from perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it appears that the victim is a major lady, who had a love relationship with the applicant and was a consenting party, but after some time their relationship could not be materialized, then she filed aforesaid case against the present applicant, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Sandeep Meravi, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he 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. 5 (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he 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 his 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) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Abhishek