1 CGHC010232682026 2026:CGHC:31273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5598 of 2026 Yogesh Kashyap S/o Prahalad Kashyap Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Semaria, Ward No. 18, Bajrang Chowk, P.S. Birra, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Birra, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2026, registered at Police Station : Birra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 of the BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the prosecutrix has lodged written report before P.S. Birra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) against the VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.23 11:03:27 +0530 2 applicant stating that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her on pretext of marriage. On the basis of written report made by prosecutrix, the police station Birra, District Janjgir Champa has registered Crime No.53/2026 against the applicant. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not acted in the manner alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the applicant and the prosecutrix, both aged about 19 years, are residents of the same village, were studying in the same school, and had known each other since 2024. According to the applicant, they were in a consensual love relationship, and their families had agreed to their marriage, for which an engagement was held on 28.01.2026 and the marriage was fixed for 28.03.2026. However, owing to the applicant's unemployment, the family members of the prosecutrix allegedly refused to solemnize the marriage, following which, under family pressure, the prosecutrix lodged the present FIR after about three months of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, and the medical examination of the prosecutrix did not reveal any external or internal injuries. The applicant is a 19-year-old student who has passed Class XII and is preparing for competitive examinations. Accordingly, he deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant established physical relations with the prosecutrix on the promise of marriage and later refused to marry her and that the 3 applicant has one criminal antecedent; therefore, he is not entitled to be released on regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the material available on record, including the FIR and the statements recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, which prima facie indicate that the victim, being a major, was in a consensual relationship with the applicant, during which a physical relationship was established and thereafter the relationship could not materialize, leading to the lodging of the present FIR, and further taking into account that the applicant has been in custody since 12.04.2026 and that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let applicant, Yogesh Kashyap, involved in Crime No. 53/2026, registered at Police Station : Birra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav