1 CGHC010181072026 2026:CGHC:30015 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4311 of 2026 Ravi Kumar Chandravanshi S/o Hariram Chandravanshi Aged About 33 Years R/o House No. 127, Village Parsawara, Thana Pandaria, Tehsil Pandiya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, District Kabirdham, (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sourabh Dangi, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.11/2026 registered at Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 81, 296 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim lodged a written complaint before Mahila Thana, Kawardha alleging, inter alia, that about ten years ago, while both were studying at Pandaria College, she came in contact with the present applicant and they developed KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 a relationship. It is alleged that the applicant induced her into a physical relationship on the promise of marriage and thereafter repeatedly established physical relations with her at different places by assuring that he would marry her. It is further alleged that on 06.03.2021, the applicant got an agreement (Ikrarnama) executed and also solemnized an Arya Samaj marriage with the victim, but subsequently kept avoiding a social marriage on one pretext or another. It is further alleged that despite repeatedly assuring the victim that he would marry her, the applicant later refused to solemnize a social marriage, got engaged to another woman and also threatened the victim with dire consequences if she reported the matter. On the basis of the said complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the relationship between the applicant and the victim was a long-standing consensual relationship spanning nearly ten years and both of them had voluntarily entered into the relationship while being fully aware of their respective religions and the social impediments involved. He further submits that both parties had executed an Ikrarnama dated 06.03.2021 and had also solemnized an Arya Samaj marriage, which clearly demonstrates the applicant's bona fide intention to marry the victim and therefore, it cannot be said that the relationship was founded on a false promise of marriage. He further submits that subsequently the relationship could not culminate into a social marriage due to opposition from the 3 victim’s family, who insisted that the applicant should convert to Islam and undergo circumcision, which he refused. He further submits that thereafter, when the applicant's marriage with another woman was fixed, the victim started demanding money and also got a registered sale deed executed in her favour in respect of the applicant's agricultural land and thereafter demanded a further amount of Rs.10 lakhs and when the applicant refused, the present FIR came to be lodged. He further submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 25.04.2026, has five criminal antecedents as the same has been explained in the bail application of para 4(a). Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the victim, in her complaint as well as in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, has consistently stated that the applicant established physical relations with her repeatedly on the false assurance of marriage, despite knowing that he would not solemnize a social marriage with her and ultimately refused to marry her after getting engaged to another woman. He further submits that the victim has also alleged that the applicant threatened her with dire consequences if she lodged any complaint against him. It is, therefore, submitted that the material collected during investigation prima facie supports the prosecution case and therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the long-standing relationship between the parties, the fact that an Ikrarnama as well as an Arya Samaj marriage was admittedly performed between them, the submissions made on behalf of the applicant regarding the circumstances in which the relationship subsequently came to an end, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 25.04.2026 and also considering his criminal antecedents thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant -Ravi Kumar Chandravanshi, involved in Crime No.11/2026 registered at Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 81, 296 and 351(3) of the 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. 5 (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 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