1 2026:CGHC:15862 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3103 of 2026 • Mahendra Banjare S/o Mohar Ram Banjare, Aged About 35 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village Churtela, P.S. And Tahsil Dabhara, District Sakti (Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Dabhara, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 49/2026, registered at Police Station-Dabhara, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that in the month of October 2025 the prosecutrix with her husband and children gone to Punjab for working in brick kiln where the present applicant is contractor VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.04.07 16:58:16 +0530 2 during this period the prosecutrix and present applicant talk to each other and December, 2025 she returned back to her village. On 28.12.2025 at about 12 PM when prosecutrix was alone at her house at that time the present applicant entered the house and raped her first time and threten her thereafter on 09.01.2026 at about 2.30 PM again raped her at that time the husband of the prosecutrx came to the house and thereafter on 11.02.2026 written complaint moved by the prosecutrix and on the basis of said complaint FIR No. 49/2026 under section 64(1) of BNS has been registered against the present applicant and during the course of investigation applicant was arrested on 11.02.2026 and after completion of investigation challan was filed. Hence, this application. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further argued that victim is married lady and having children. He also submits that applicant and victim were used to talk each other and in a relationship, when the said fact came into knowledge to the husband of the victim, she lodged FIR against the victim. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and applicant is in jail since 11.02.2026. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the victim had gone to work at a brick kiln in Punjab along with her husband and children, where the present applicant served as the contractor. During this period, interactions took place between the victim and the present applicant, and in December 2025, she returned to her village. On December 28, 2025, at approximately 12:00 PM, while the victim was 3 alone at her home, the present applicant barged into the house, raped her for the first time, and threatened her. Subsequently, on January 9, 2026, at approximately 2:30 PM, he raped her again; at that moment, the victim's husband arrived home. Thereafter, on February 11, 2026, a written complaint was lodged by the victim. Therefore, he is not entitiled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the State and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant and period of detention in jail, further the fact that the victim is a major lady and there was some relationship made between the applicant and the victim, and thereafter, a consensual sexual relationship was established between both of them, when the said fact came into knowledge to the husband of the victim, hence, she filed the FIR and she is the consenting party, also the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 11.02.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant – Mahendra Banjare involved in Crime No.49/2026, registered at Police Station-Dabhara, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (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 4 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 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali