1 CGHC010272682026 2026:CGHC:30939 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6520 of 2026 Govardhan Lal Sharma S/o Udaylal Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Sadar Bazar, Near Bajrang Talkies Champa, Police Station Champa, Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Mahila Police Thana, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2026 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. 04/2026 registered at Police Station : Mahila Police Thana, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(M) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, is that the victim lodged a written complaint alleging that she had earlier taken a loan from the applicant. It is alleged that on 01.03.2026, when she visited the office of the applicant situated at Madanpurgarh Gitti Khadan, the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 applicant caught hold of her hand and forcibly established physical relations with her against her will. It is further alleged that the applicant threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident to anyone and also recorded a video of the incident, threatening to make the same viral. Owing to such fear and intimidation, the victim did not immediately report the matter. Thereafter, on 06.03.2026, the applicant allegedly called the victim to the same place by threatening to circulate the video and again established physical relations with her. It is further alleged that thereafter the applicant repeatedly contacted the victim on her mobile phone and continued to harass her. The victim has also alleged that the applicant demanded that she bring along her two younger sisters and friends, due to which she was subjected to further harassment. It is further alleged that on 17.04.2026, the applicant retained the victim’s mobile phone, namely OPPO A6, on account of non-payment of the loan amount. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the impugned FIR came to be registered against the applicant. During the course of investigation, the wife of the applicant, namely Sudha Sharma, submitted a written representation dated 13.06.2026 before the Superintendent of Police, District Janjgir-Champa, asserting that the FIR had been falsely lodged and that on the alleged date of the first incident, i.e., 01.03.2026, the applicant was not present at Champa. It was stated that the applicant, along with his wife and family members, had travelled to Haryana on 24.02.2026 to attend the Mundan ceremony of his younger brother’s son and returned only on 02.03.2026 by flight from Delhi to Raipur. In support of the said claim, copies of flight tickets, boarding 3 passes, hotel booking details and photographs were furnished. However, after completion of investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the applicant on 04.07.2026 without accepting the aforesaid defence. The applicant thereafter preferred an application for regular bail before the Court below, which came to be rejected. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicant is engaged in the business of money lending and, in the ordinary course of such business, had advanced a loan of Rs. 25,000/- to the victim. Since the victim failed to repay the said amount, she voluntarily handed over her mobile phone, namely OPPO A6, valued at approximately Rs. 20,000/-, towards part satisfaction of the outstanding liability, with the balance amount of Rs. 5,000/- remaining payable by her. In support of the said transaction, learned counsel has drawn attention to a receipt/document dated 19.04.2024, allegedly bearing the signatures of the victim as well as two independent witnesses, namely Naushad Khan and Sameer. It is submitted that the present allegations have been levelled only to avoid repayment of the loan amount and to exert undue pressure upon the applicant. He further submits that the allegations made by the victim are inherently improbable inasmuch as the first alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 01.03.2026, whereas the applicant, along with his wife and family members, had travelled to Haryana on 24.02.2026 to attend the Mundan ceremony of his younger brother’s son and 4 returned only on 02.03.2026 by flight from Delhi to Raipur. It is submitted that the wife of the applicant had brought these facts to the notice of the Superintendent of Police, Janjgir-Champa, by way of a written representation dated 13.06.2026 and had furnished supporting documents including flight tickets, boarding passes, hotel booking details and photographs demonstrating the applicant’s presence outside Champa on the alleged date of occurrence. However, despite the availability of such material, the investigating agency proceeded to file the charge-sheet on 04.07.2026 without properly considering the said documents. It is further submitted that the dispute between the parties essentially arose out of the repayment of the loan amount and has been given a criminal colour by lodging the present FIR. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is in jail since 21.05.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She further submits that there are specific and serious allegations against the applicant. It is submitted that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, has categorically alleged that on 01.03.2026, when she had gone to the applicant’s office situated at Madanpurgarh to repay the loan 5 amount, the applicant forcibly established physical relations with her and recorded a video of the incident, thereafter threatening to make the same viral and to kill her if she disclosed the incident to anyone. The victim has further alleged that on 06.03.2026 and subsequently on other occasions, the applicant again subjected her to sexual assault by extending threats and intimidation. It is further submitted that the victim has specifically stated that the applicant used to pressure her to bring her younger sisters and friends, wrongfully retained her mobile phone, abused and threatened her, and continued to exploit her by taking advantage of the fear created by him. The victim has also alleged that the document relied upon by the applicant regarding handing over of the mobile phone was obtained under pressure and coercion. She also submits that the statement of the victim is duly supported by the material collected during investigation. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature of allegations, the material available on record, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, and further the fact that the relationship between the parties, at least prima facie, requires deeper scrutiny during trial. The record reveals that the victim admittedly had financial dealings with the applicant and had been in regular contact with him. The applicant has placed on record material to show that disputes existed between the parties regarding repayment of the loan 6 amount and has also relied upon documents indicating that, on the date of the first alleged incident, he was allegedly outside the State along with his family members. The evidentiary value and correctness of the rival claims are matters to be examined during trial. Further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court, he has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 21.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let applicant, Govardhan Lal Sharma, involved in Crime No. 04/2026 registered at Police Station : Mahila Police Thana, District Janjgir- Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(M) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount 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 7 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. 8. 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 Rahul Dewangan