1 CGHC010252422026 2026:CGHC:28209 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6061 of 2026 Rishi Dubey Alias Basant Dubey S/o Bharat Lal Dubey Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Sargbundia, Police Station Urga, District, Korba, Chhattisgarh. Wrongly Mention As Bharat Dubey In Arm A/1. Applicant's Name Correct As Per A/1. Page 10. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Urga, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicants : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 184/2026 registered at Police Station Urga, District : Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 67(A) of I.T. Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim, a married woman KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 aged about 30 years, came into contact with the present applicant, Basant Dubey, in her village. After their acquaintance, the applicant allegedly clicked an objectionable selfie photograph of the victim and thereafter started threatening her with the same. It is alleged that, under such threat, the applicant established physical relations with the victim in the year 2023 and continued to have sexual intercourse with her for about 3–4 months against her will. It is further alleged that the applicant also captured objectionable screenshots of the victim during a WhatsApp video call and forwarded the same to the co-accused, Krishna Sharma, who thereafter allegedly circulated the said screenshots in the village through his mobile phone. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the victim, FIR No. 184/2026 dated 25.03.2026 was registered at the concerned Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested on 25.03.2026 and after completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the allegations are vague, unsupported by any reliable documentary or electronic evidence and that no material has been collected during the course of investigation to establish that the applicant had either shared any objectionable photograph or screenshot with the co-accused. He further submits that no 3 incriminating recovery has been made from the possession of the applicant and the prosecution case is based merely on unsubstantiated allegations. It is also contended that the alleged incident pertains to the year 2023, whereas the FIR came to be lodged only on 25.03.2026, after an unexplained and inordinate delay. Learned counsel further submits that there existed prior disputes and cross criminal cases between the complainant's family and the co-accused and on account of such enmity the present applicant has also been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the co-accused, Krishna Sharma, has already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4562/2026 vide order dated 14.05.2026, and, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 25.03.2026, the charge- sheet has already been filed, the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., duly supports the prosecution case. It is submitted that the applicant established physical relationship with the victim and also captured objectionable screenshots of the victim without her consent, which were subsequently made viral through the co-accused despite the victim's objection. Considering the serious nature of the allegations, the material collected during the course of investigation and the 4 statement of the victim, learned State counsel submits that no case for grant of bail is made out and, therefore, the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, period of detention of the applicant since 25.03.2026 and also considering the fact that from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., it appears that the victim is a major married woman and the parties remained in a relationship for a considerable period during which they established physical relations, further considering that the alleged incident pertains to the year 2023 whereas the FIR came to be lodged on 25.03.2026 after a substantial and unexplained delay, for which no satisfactory explanation has been offered, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the co-accused Krishna Sharma has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4562/2026 vide order dated 14.05.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant- Rishi Dubey Alias Basant Dubey, involved in Crime No. 184/2026 registered at Police Station Urga, District : Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of 5 the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 67(A) of I.T. Act, 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 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 6 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. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal