1 CGHC010303652026 2026:CGHC:34748 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7186 of 2026 Baneshwar Rathiya S/o Bhuknandan Rathiya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tarekela, P.S. and Tehsil Chhal, Distt. - Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.156/2026, registered at Police Station – Dharamjaigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant lodged an FIR alleging that on 25.05.2026, while she was staying at her maternal home in Village Gerasa along with her two children, she was proceeding towards Borbari, situated at some distance from the house. It is alleged that the applicant followed her, and when both of her children went PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.08.10 11:14:28 +0530 2 towards a nearby mango orchard, the applicant forcibly established physical relations with her against her will. The complainant further alleged that after a few days, she disclosed the incident to her husband, whereupon the present FIR was lodged. On the basis of the said report, an offence under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) was registered, investigation was conducted, and upon completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was 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 submitted that the applicant is the husband of the complainant's cousin sister and that the applicant and the complainant used to communicate with each other. Owing to a dispute between them and the suspicion entertained by the complainant's husband regarding their relationship, the present FIR has been lodged with a view to falsely implicate the applicant. It is further submitted that there is an unexplained delay of six days in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 31.05.2026. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. She further submits that the applicant, who is the husband of the complainant's cousin sister, took advantage of the fact that the complainant was alone and, when her children had gone towards a nearby mango orchard, 3 allegedly committed forcible sexual intercourse with her against her will. Learned State counsel also submits that, as per the MLC report, an abrasion was found on the body of the victim, and the doctor has opined that recent sexual intercourse cannot be ruled out. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the medical evidence collected during the investigation, it is submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail and, therefore, the present bail application deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the case diary and the material available on record and the fact that the applicant, who is the husband of the victim's cousin sister, took advantage of the fact that the victim was alone and, when her children had gone towards a nearby mango orchard, allegedly committed forcible sexual intercourse with her against her will, further as per the MLC report, an abrasion was found on the body of the victim, and the doctor has opined that recent sexual intercourse cannot be ruled out, moreover considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the medical evidence collected during the investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Baneshwar Rathiya involved in Crime No.156/2026, registered at Police Station – Dharamjaigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 4 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 Preeti