1 CGHC010303752026 2026:CGHC:38435 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1286 of 2026 Mithlesh Gaikwad S/o Netram Gaikwad Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Pendri, Post Suhela, Police Station Suhela, District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Lalit Jangde, Advocate For State : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 31.08.2026 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 her arrest in connection with Crime No. 469/2026 registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offences SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.08.31 16:34:43 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 69 and 351 (2) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant filed a written complaint before Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.), alleging that on 03.01.2026, at about 12:00 PM, the applicant took her to Pyramid Hotel and, on the false pretext of marriage, established a physical relationship with her. It is alleged that the applicant represented himself as a bachelor and promised to marry the complainant. Both the applicant and the complainant belong to the same caste. The applicant allegedly established a physical relationship with the complainant on the assurance of marriage but subsequently refused to marry her. It is further alleged that the family members of both the applicant and the complainant were agreeable to the proposed marriage; however, the applicant subsequently refused to marry the complainant. Hence, this anticipatory bail application. 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 and the victim were in a consensual relationship and were having a love affair. Learned counsel further submits that both the applicant and the victim are married to their respective spouses and that the victim is aged about 40 years. It is further submitted that 3 there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant deserves to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the material available on record, this Court has carefully considered the rival submissions. It is not in dispute that the applicant and the victim are both married persons and are having their respective spouses. The circumstances emerging from the record also indicate that the applicant and the victim were known to each other and were in a relationship. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, particularly the fact that both the applicant and the victim are married persons, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer made by the applicant for 4 grant of anticipatory bail deserves consideration. Further, there is nothing on record at this stage to indicate that the applicant is likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence, subject to his cooperation with the investigation and compliance with the conditions imposed by this Court. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or upon the truthfulness of the allegations levelled against the applicant, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Mithlesh Gaikwad, on executing a personal bond and one local 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. 5 (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 themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saurabh