1 CGHC010181992026 2026:CGHC:28569 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4399 of 2026 Arvind Mendhe S/o Late Manikdas Aged About 44 Years R/o Indra Nagar, B.M.Y. Charoda, P.S. Old Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Old Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 457/2025 registered at Police Station - Old Bhilai, District - Durg,(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(A)(i) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the victim lodged a written complaint on 19.11.2025, alleging that the present applicant took her to a secluded place, manipulated her body, and touched her private parts. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered the F.I.R. and arrested the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.10 11:30:11 +0530 2 and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Learned counsel further submits that, although the Police have registered the offence under Section 64(2)(a)(i) of the BNS, 2023, which pertains to the offence of rape, a plain reading of the written complaint and the F.I.R. reveals that no allegation of any penetrative sexual act has been made against the applicant. Therefore, the essential ingredients of the said offence are, prima facie, not attracted, rendering the invocation of the aforesaid provision legally unsustainable. It is further submitted that the victim's son is in judicial custody in connection with an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. According to the applicant, the victim had approached him seeking his assistance in securing her son's release, however, upon his refusal, she falsely implicated him in the present case. Learned counsel also submits that the applicant had been married only two months prior to the alleged incident and was serving as a police officer. Owing to the present case and his continued incarceration, his services have been terminated. It is further submitted that the victim refused to undergo medical examination and, therefore, no medical evidence is available on record to corroborate the allegations levelled against the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 15.04.2026, has no criminal antecedents, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submits that, in compliance with the order dated 12.05.2026 passed by this Court, an affidavit has been filed by the Investigating Officer. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and upon perusal of the case diary and other material available on record, it appears that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, further considering the fact that the applicant has already been suspended from service, has been in judicial custody since 15.04.2026, has no criminal antecedents, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Arvind Mendhe, involved in Crime No. 457/2025 registered at Police Station - Old Bhilai, District - Durg,(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(A)(i) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 4 269 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 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 certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dirurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti