1 CGHC010250542026 2026:CGHC:31008 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1018 of 2026 Lokesh Nayak S/o Shri Khemlal Nayak Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Sukhri, Post Chandan P.S. Rajadevri, District- Balodabazar (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Prafull Bharat, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-applicants/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 21.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 534/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 69 and 351(2) of BNS and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. As per the prosecution story, the victim submitted a written complaint before the Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, District Bilaspur (C.G.), alleging that she is a resident of Sumitra Vihar, Maharshi School Road, Bilaspur, and is pursuing B.A. Second Year, whereas her parents reside at Kawardha. It is alleged that in the year 2023, the present applicant Lokesh Nayak, a resident of Village Sukhri Giroudhpuri, District Baloda Bazar, came to reside as a tenant in her house for the purpose of pursuing his studies. The victim has alleged that her date of birth is 22.02.2006 and at the relevant point of time she was 17 years of age. During his stay as a tenant, the applicant allegedly used to tell the victim that she was good and that he would marry her, because of which she became disturbed by his conduct. It is further alleged that on 05.12.2023, when her parents had gone to Mungeli and she was alone in the house, at about 2:00 p.m., the applicant entered her room, embraced her and told her that he would marry her, thereafter closed the door of the room and against her wishes, removed her clothes and established physical relations with her. It is alleged that while leaving, the applicant asked the victim not to disclose the incident to anyone, assuring her that he would marry her. It is further alleged that thereafter the applicant continued to establish physical relations with the victim on several occasions on the pretext of marriage whenever her parents were not present in the house. It is also alleged that in the year 2025, although the applicant vacated the rented accommodation and shifted to Chaddabadi, he continued to establish physical relations with the 3 victim on several occasions. According to the victim, on account of the said relationship she became pregnant on three occasions, however, each time the applicant allegedly procured medicines from a medical store and administered the same to her, resulting in termination of her pregnancy. It is further alleged that on 12.03.2026, when her parents had again gone to Mungeli, the applicant informed her that he was coming to meet her, came to her house and again forcibly established physical relations with her. When the victim insisted upon marriage, the applicant allegedly threatened to kill her. The victim further disclosed that she was carrying a pregnancy of about 5-6 weeks and was undergoing treatment at a clinic situated near Mangla Chowk, Bilaspur. She also alleged that she had informed her parents and one of her friends about the incident and had visited the village of the applicant on two or three occasions. On the basis of the aforesaid written complaint, the present FIR came to be registered against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, whereafter investigation was taken up. 3. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that a bare perusal of the FIR itself would reveal that the applicant and the victim were in a love affair and had voluntarily developed a consensual physical relationship. It is further submitted that though the victim has alleged that the first incident 4 occurred on 05.12.2023, the present FIR has been lodged only on 21.04.2026, after an unexplained delay of more than two years. He further submits that the applicant was not residing at Bilaspur in the year 2023 and had shifted to Bilaspur only in the year 2024, where he came into contact with the victim and therefore, the allegation relating to the incident dated 05.12.2023 has been deliberately introduced only to aggravate the nature of the offence. It is further submitted that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 also indicates that both the applicant and the victim were in a relationship from the year 2023 till 2025. He further submits that the victim herself visited the village of the applicant on two to three occasions and also visited him after he shifted to Chaddabadi, where they voluntarily established physical relations. It is further submitted that the date of birth of the victim, as mentioned in the FIR, is 22.02.2006, and except for the first alleged incident, all subsequent incidents are stated to have occurred after she had attained the age of majority. According to him, this clearly indicates that the physical relationship between the parties was consensual and continued voluntarily. He further submits that in order to substantiate the existence of the love affair between the parties, the applicant has placed certain photographs on record along with the bail application. It is also submitted that the applicant has clean antecedents, has never been involved in any criminal case in the past, the investigation is still in progress and the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the Investigating Agency, to appear 5 before the Investigating Officer as and when required and not to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the victim was a minor at the time of the first alleged incident and the allegations levelled in the FIR as well as in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS prima facie disclose that the applicant established physical relations with the victim on the false promise of marriage and continued to exploit her thereafter. He further submits that the plea of consensual relationship, delay in lodging the FIR, or the photographs relied upon by the applicant are all matters of evidence to be examined during trial and cannot be considered at this stage for extending the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the objector vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that though the victim and the applicant were admittedly in a relationship from the year 2023 till 2025, the said relationship was induced and continued solely on the false promise of marriage extended by the applicant. He further submits that during the subsistence of their relationship, the victim became pregnant on more than one occasion and the 6 applicant, instead of fulfilling his promise to marry her, got the pregnancies terminated by administering medicines. It is further submitted that the victim was carrying a pregnancy of about 5–6 weeks, which is also supported by the medical documents filed along with the case diary. He submits that the conduct of the applicant clearly demonstrates that from the very inception he had no intention to marry the victim and repeatedly exploited her physically by extending a false promise of marriage. He further submits that the allegations made in the FIR are duly corroborated by the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS as well as the medical material collected during investigation. It is, therefore, submitted that considering the serious nature of the allegations and the stage of investigation, the applicant is not entitled to the extraordinary discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the respective parties and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the victim was admittedly below 18 years of age at the time of the first alleged incident dated 05.12.2023. Prima facie, the allegations in the FIR as well as the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 disclose that the applicant established physical relations with her on 7 the pretext of marriage and continued the same on several occasions. It also appears from the material available on record that the victim allegedly conceived on more than one occasion and the pregnancies were terminated, which is sought to be supported by the medical documents collected during the course of investigation. At this stage, the pleas raised by the applicant regarding consensual relationship, delay in lodging of the FIR, and the photographs relied upon by him are matters which require appreciation of evidence and cannot be conclusively examined while considering an application for anticipatory bail. 8. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the stage of investigation and the material collected by the prosecution, this Court is not inclined to extend the extraordinary discretionary relief of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant – Lokesh Nayak, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 534/2026, registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 69 and 351(2) of BNS and Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal