1 2026:CGHC:3706 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 115 of 2026 Vaibhav Sharma S/o Sanjay Sharma Aged About 23 Years R/o H. No. 17/504, Behind Imlipara Stadium, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Civil Lines, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, learned Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 1352/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Lines District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 69 of the BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case, the complainant lodged an FIR against the present applicant at the concerned police station alleging that the VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.22 12:14:16 +0530 2 applicant established sexual relations with her on the false pretext of marriage. It is alleged that the incident took place during the period from 13.03.2024 to 01.04.2025, during which the applicant repeatedly assured the complainant that he would marry her and, on that assurance, developed physical relations with her. The prosecution further alleges that despite repeated requests and efforts made by the complainant, the applicant ultimately refused to solemnize the marriage, as a result of which, feeling aggrieved and cheated, the complainant lodged the present FIR against the applicant. 3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits the applicant has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offence that as per the FIR, the alleged incident is stated to have occurred between 13.03.2021 and 01.04.2025, whereas the FIR was lodged only on 12.11.2025 without any explanation for the inordinate delay, which itself casts serious doubt on the prosecution story; that both the complainant and the applicant were majors at the relevant time and no promise, inducement, or assurance of marriage was ever given by the applicant, nor has he committed any sexual act as alleged that prior to lodging of the FIR, the applicant had already filed a complaint under Section 174 of the BNSS before the respondent police station on 11.10.2025, alleging that the complainant was demanding Rs. 25,000/-, and upon refusal, she lodged the present false FIR out of anger and malice, a copy of the NCR report being filed as Annexure A/3; that the delay of more than two years clearly demonstrates the ulterior motive of the complainant and that the present FIR is nothing but a counterblast to the complaint filed by the applicant; that the 3 applicant has no criminal antecedents, is an undergraduate student with reputation and standing in society, and his arrest would cause irreparable harm to his prestige and future; that the trial is likely to take considerable time, the applicant is a permanent resident as shown in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with prosecution witnesses, and he undertakes to cooperate fully with the investigation and trial, abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State, and submits that the applicant, on the pretext of marriage, had sexual relations with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, it appears that the victim, being a major, and the present applicant were known to each other and were in a consensual relationship, during which a physical relationship was established. Thereafter, when the relationship could not culminate in marriage, the present FIR came to be lodged by the victim on the allegation that the applicant refused to marry her. Therefore, without making any further comments on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Vaibhav Sharma, on executing a 4 personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav