1 CGHC010337322026 2026:CGHC:38832 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8108 of 2026 Dinoj Bada S/o Shri Sanwari, Bada, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Parsodi, Khud, Uraonpara, P. S. Darima, District Sarguja, C G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Vishrampur District Surajpur C. G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02/09/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0106/2026 registered at Police Station Vishrampur District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 under Sections 64(m), 332(b) and 69 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.04.2026, the complainant lodged a written report at Police Station Vishrampur, District Surajpur, alleging that the present applicant established physical relations with the victim during the period from 27.12.2024 to 04.02.2026 on the pretext of marriage and subsequently refused to marry her. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 0106/2026 was registered against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, the prosecution filed the final report before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surajpur, for offences punishable under Sections 69, 332(b) and 64(m) of the BNS, 2023. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the material available on record does not prima facie establish the commission of offences under Sections 69, 332(b) and 64(m) of the BNS, 2023 against the present applicant, the parties were in a consensual relationship/love affair, the victim is a major and was a consenting party, and the medical report does not support the prosecution case. He also submits that the alleged incidents are stated to have occurred during the period from 27.12.2024 to 04.02.2026, whereas the FIR was lodged on 24.04.2026, and no plausible 3 explanation has been offered by the prosecution for the delay in lodging the report. The applicant is in jail since 13.06.2026, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS stated that she is a homemaker and has studied up to Class 10th . She stated that in the year 2020, she became acquainted with the applicant, Danoj Bada, resident of Village Parsodi, who used to visit her shop and had earlier resided with his family at Village Karampur. Thereafter, the applicant expressed his love for her and she came under his influence. She further stated that on 27.12.2024 at about 10:00 p.m., when no one was present at her house, the applicant came there and, assuring her that he would marry her, took her to the room where she used to sleep and, despite her refusal, had sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter, whenever he got an opportunity, he allegedly subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse despite her refusal. She alleged that from 27.12.2024 to 04.02.2026, the applicant continuously subjected her to sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage. She further stated that on 06.09.2025, the applicant took her to Ambikapur, where he kept her in a rented room till January 2026 and continued to have 4 forcible sexual intercourse with her. When she asked him to marry her, he refused and told her that he would not marry her and that she could do whatever she wanted. She alleged that the applicant had ruined her life. 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 13.06.2026, the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that he established physical relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage during the period from 27.12.2024 to 04.02.2026 and subsequently refused to marry her and the said fact is also corroborated from the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, but considering the fact that the victim is a major lady and was acquainted with the applicant since 2024, and both were in a consensual relationship, during which they established physical relations with each other on multiple occasion, wherein victim was the consenting party and when their relationship could not materialized, victim lodged the present FIR against the applicant, also considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 5 8. Let the Applicant-Dinoj Bada, involved in Crime No. 0106/2026 registered at Police Station Vishrampur District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(m), 332(b) and 69 of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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 6 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil