1 CGHC010302852026 2026:CGHC:34782 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7242 of 2026 1 - Patiram Nag S/o Hadma Ram Nag Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Sonakukanar, Pujaripara, P.S. Gadiras, District Sukma Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Gadiras, District Sukma Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 13/2026 registered at Police Station Gadiras, District Sukma (Chhattisgarh), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 331(6) RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 and 351(3) of BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that while the victim's husband had gone to Andhra Pradesh for work, the accused, Patiram Nag, allegedly trespassed into the victim's house on the night of 03.05.2026 and, after threatening her with dire consequences, committed forcible sexual intercourse against her will. It is further alleged that on 05.05.2026, the accused again came to the victim's house and attempted to sexually assault her, but fled from the spot when the victim raised an alarm and the neighbours gathered there. After the victim's husband returned, she narrated the incident to him, and thereafter, following family consultation, a report was lodged at Police Station Gadiras. On the basis of the written complaint, FIR bearing Crime No. 13/2026 was registered for offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 331(6) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Upon completion of the investigation, the applicant was arrested on 16.05.2026, and a charge- sheet has since been filed before the competent Court. 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 statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, reveals that at the relevant time, the victim's husband had gone to Andhra Pradesh to earn his livelihood and the victim was residing with her mother-in-law and father-in-law. It is further submitted that the victim was in a consensual relationship with the applicant and that they had consensual physical relations on 03.05.2026. It is also argued that, as per the FIR, the second incident is alleged to have occurred on 05.05.2026, whereas in 3 her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, the victim stated that the second incident took place on 12.05.2026, when she and the applicant were found in a compromising position by the villagers, upon which the applicant fled from the spot. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 16.05.2026, the investigation has been completed, the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that, although the investigation has been completed, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and no internal injuries were found on the body of the victim during her medical examination, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific accusation against the applicant, and the material collected during the course of the investigation, no case for grant of regular bail is made out. It is, therefore, prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the investigation has been completed, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in judicial custody since 16.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered opinion that the 4 applicant deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the discrepancies pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant, including the variance regarding the date of the second incident as reflected in the FIR and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, as well as the absence of any internal injuries in the medical examination of the victim, are matters to be appreciated during trial and cannot be conclusively adjudicated at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant – Patiram Nag involved in Crime No.-13/2026 registered at Police Station Gadiras, District Sukma (Chhattisgarh), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 331(6) and 351(3) of BNS, be released on bail on furnishing 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. (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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. 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 Ruchi