1 CGHC010306132026 2026:CGHC:40817 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7365 of 2026 Raja @ Danish Khalifa S/o Md. Samim Ahmed Aged About 19 Years R/o Ghutrapara, P.S. And Tehsil Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Jigyasa Singh, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Kawaljeet Singh Saini, Deputy Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.21/2026, registered at Police Station Kamleshwarpur, District – Surguja for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(M) & 3(5) of BNS. 2. Prosecution in brief if that co-accused Arman Ansari was acquainted with the victim/prosecutrix for approximately two years. On 15.08.2025, in the forest area of Mainpat, accused Arman Ansari allegedly subjected the victim to forcible sexual 2 intercourse under the false pretext and promise of marriage. On 10.04.2026, accused Arman Ansari, along with co-accused Raja alias Danish Khalifa and Rajab Iqbal, arrived at Mainpat. The accused persons induced and lured the proseuctrix, and other minor victim (acquainted with accused Raja alias Danish Khalifa), and a 19-year-old female companion of co-accused Rajab Iqbal under the false inducement of lucrative employment and higher wages in Pune. Under this pretext they went to Pune. At a factory premises in Pune, accused Arman Ansari again committed forcible sexual assault upon the prosecutrix. On 14.04.2026. On report being lodged to the above effect, the applicant has been arrested by the Police. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the prosecutrix along with her two friends, accompanied by the present applicant and two other co-accused persons, had gone to Pune, Maharashtra, in search of livelihood, where they stayed for about 3 to 4 days. She would further submit that in the present case, there is no allegation of sexual assault against the present applicant, the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has already been filed; the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.04.2026. She would further submit that the prosecutrix was a major girl aged about 19 years; thus, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that serious allegations have been levelled against the applicant; therefore, he is not entitled to grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has already been submitted; the applicant is in custody since 16.04.2026; there is no allegation of sexual assault against the present aplplicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the bail application filed by the applicant is allowed. 3 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail, on following conditions :- (i) 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, (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim