1 CGHC010328552026 2026:CGHC:42510 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7986 of 2026 Mukesh Kumar Sahu S/o Late Keshaw Sahu Aged About 23 Years Caste- Teli, R/o Nagar Panchyat Premnagar, Ward No.11, Thana And Tehsil- Premnagar, District- Surajpur (C.G.). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Premnagar, District- Surajpur (C.G.). ... Non--Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 97/2026, registered at Police Station Premnagar, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for offences punishable under Sections 64(2), 332, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant and the prosecutrix reside in the same locality opposite to each other. The prosecutrix is a married woman having three children. It is alleged that 2 on 10.04.2026, the applicant entered the house of the prosecutrix and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse; thereafter, he continued to sexually exploit her repeatedly under threats and intimidation. Despite interventions and advice by the husband of the prosecutrix, the applicant allegedly continued to threaten her over the phone, threatened her family members, called her father, and publicizing the alleged relationship in the entire village. Being distressed, the prosecutrix lodged the FIR against the applicant at Police Station Premnagar. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant is aged about 23 years old, has no criminal antecedents. He further contends that there was a consensual relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix, who is a mature woman and mother of three children, and the allegations of force and intimidation is a concocted story; thus, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are grave and heinous. She submits that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has made categorical and serious allegations of repeated rape, criminal intimidation, and harassment against the applicant; thus, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 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, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that the applicant and the prosecutrix are immediate neighbours residing in the same locality, coupled with the specific and serious allegations levelled by the 3 prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 explicitly narrating the allegation of repeated rape, intimidation, and harassment caused to her and her family members by putting her under fear, which prima facie disclose serious complicity of the applicant in a heinous offence against a woman, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant at this stage; accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim