1 CGHC010184982026 2026:CGHC:28962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4372 of 2026 • Hemant Agarwal S/o- Lt. Jeevan Lal Agarwal Aged About 40 Years R/o- Amleshwar, V R T Colony, District- Durg, (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Jamul, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pragalbh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.918/2025, registered at Police Station- Jamul, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 85, 64(2)(m), 138, 351(3) and 89 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 4017/2026 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 01.05.2026. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.07.14 11:16:24 +0530 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the mother of the victim lodged an FIR on 19.11.2025 before the police of police-station- Jamul, Durg, Distt. - Durg (C.G.). It s alleged in the aforesaid complaint that the principal accused/applicant, Hemant Agrawal, wrongfully confined the victim in Raipur for a period of approximately one and a half years, during which he forcibly solemnized a sham Arya Samaj marriage. It is further averred that the victim managed to escape and seek refuge at a Sakhi Centre, following which she was brought back to her maternal residence approximately fifteen days prior to the subject incident. Subsequently, on 19.11.2025 at about 10:30 AM, the principal accused, acting in concert with other co- accused persons, who arrived in 2 (Two) vehicles, allegedly subjected the victim to physical assault and forcibly abducted her from her maternal home in Kurud. Hence, the FIR registered against the applicant, therefore this bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application, earlier bail application of the applicant bearing MCRC No.4017/2026 was dismissed as withdraw vide order dated 01.05.2026. It is further submitted that victim is a major girl and she was in a relationship with the applicant, when the relationship could not materialized she lodged FIR against the applicant. He also submits that applicant is a husband of the complainant and their marriage was performed in the year 2025, and same was registered in the Aarya Smaj, and victim executed a sworn affidavit on 28.02.2024, wherein she stated that she was marrying applicant voluntarily, without any pressure of coercion. Photographs from the Arya Samaj Mandir clearly show the victim entering the wedlock willing and at that particular time also she did not try the escape the situation, this 3 clearly shows her intention to marry the applicant. Copy of affidavit along with photographs are annexed here in as Annexure-A/4 (colly). He also submits that co-accused persons have been also granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.1673 of 2026 and MCRC No.2716 of 2026. Copy of the order-sheets are annexed here in as Annexure-A/5 (Colly), He further submits that applicant is in jail since 13.01.2026, therefore, the present applicant also deserves to be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that bail application filed by other co-accused persons, MCRC No.1673 of 2026 and MCRC No.2716 of 2026. She also submits that the applicant has seven criminal antecedent and details of the same are mentioned in the affidavit, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender. She further submits that applicant statement under Section 183 of B.N.S.S of the victim is also recorded in the present case. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that this is the applicant’s second bail application and that the earlier application, MCRC No.4017/2026 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 01.05.2026, further considering the fact that applicant is a husband of the complainant and their marriage was performed in the year 2025, and same was registered in the Aarya Smaj, Further the victim executed a sworn affidavit on 28.02.2024, wherein she stated that she was marrying applicant voluntarily, without any pressure of coercion, further, applicant is in jail since 13.01.2026, hence this Court is of the considered view that, 4 the present applicant is deserves to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Hemant Agrawal, involved in Crime No.918/2025, registered at Police Station- Jamul, District- Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 85, 64(2)(m), 138, 351(3) and 89 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 her 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. 5 (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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali