1 CGHC010244352026 2026:CGHC:28251 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1050 of 2026 Arvind Kumar S/o Krishna Kumar Patre Aged About 28 Years R/o Gram Senhabhata, Thana Kunda, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) P.S. City Kotwali, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Miss Anamika Jain, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08/07/2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.247/2026 at Police Station – City Kotwali, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant met the KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.09 14:58:37 +0530 2 applicant in village Bhuniyapara, District Kabirdham where the applicant had come to her maternal uncle’s house for the purpose of shooting marriage ceremony and since then they were talking to each other on phone. Later on, when the complainant used to meet the applicant, he used to establish physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage. It is alleged that physical relations between the two were continued for 2 years & 6 months. When the family members of the complainant came to know about their relations, the applicant refused to marry her and stopped talking to her. Thereafter, the report was lodged. Hence the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is major and the applicant and the victim were having affair for the last 2 years & 6 months and subsequently, their relations were cordial and the present FIR was the outcome of the refusal of the applicant to marry. Thereafter, both of them have performed a marriage in Arya Samaj Mandir and they are living together. Therefore, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents annexed therewith. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship, which ultimately culminated in their marriage, which is evident from the marriage certificate annexed with the bail application, as such, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Arvind Kumar, on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) He should 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) He should not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he should 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 sureties shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) He should not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Barve