1 CGHC010317292026 2026:CGHC:42083 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7674 of 2026 1 - Rameshwar Sharma S/o Shri Pitamber Sharma Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 01 Kirodimal Nagar, Thana- Kotra Road Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Mahila Police Station Janjgir- Champa District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Saumya Sharma, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 28.09.2026 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. 13/2026, registered at Police Station District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 351(3) and 296 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written complaint was lodged by the prosecutrix, aged about 30 years, against the present applicant on 23.06.2026, alleging therein that the applicant used to frequently Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.09.28 15:46:26 +0530 2 visit the house of the victim about four years ago, as they were in a relationship with each other, which continued for a period of four years. It is further alleged that the present applicant made objectionable videos and forcibly established physical relations with the prosecutrix. The FIR was lodged by the victim against the applicant, pursuant to which the offences, as stated above, were registered against him. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the present applicant and the victim are related to each other and were in a consensual relationship, which continued for a period of four years, and thereafter, the FIR was lodged. He would further submit that at the time of the alleged incident, the prosecutrix was about 30 years of age. He also submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 09.07.2026. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the present applicant made objectionable videos, blackmailed the prosecutrix, and sexually assaulted her for a considerable period. There are serious allegations against the present applicant. Therefore, the application filed by the applicant for grant of bail may be rejected. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and particularly considering the fact that the victim was a mature lady at the time of the incident and there was a consensual relationship between 3 them, which continued for a period of four years, the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is in custody since 09.07.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 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) 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 4 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. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Jyoti