1 2026:CGHC:16169 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3150 of 2026 Sagar Das Manikpuri S/o Rameshwar Das Aged About 45 Years R/o Dallirajhara, Old Bazar, Near Ghonda Temple, P.S. Rajhara, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Antagarh, District- Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.04.2026 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. 43/2025, registered at Police Station - Antagarh, District- Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of Bharartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, on 11.11.2025 a complaint was lodged by the complainant that the applicant from 10.08.2023 to 21.4.2025 has committed forcible sexual intercourse with her on the basis of false pretext of marriage. On the basis of this complaint, the crime has been registered against the applicant. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.04.09 13:26:50 +0530 2 innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the victim is a married woman having children, who had deserted by her husband and thereafter came into contact with the applicant. It is submitted that a consensual physical relationship developed between them. However, when the relationship could not culminate into marriage and the applicant refused to marry her, the present FIR was lodged. It is also submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.11.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the victim on the pretext of marriage, but later refused to marry her. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and period of detention in jail, and from the perusal of the statement, it transpires that the victim is a married woman having children, who had deserted by her husband and thereafter came into contact with the applicant, a consensual physical relationship developed between them, however, when the relationship could not culminate into marriage and the applicant refused to marry her, the present FIR was lodged, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the 3 matter, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.11.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Sagar Das Manikpuri involved in Crime No. 43/2025, registered at Police Station - Antagarh, District- Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 69 of Bharartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 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, 4 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/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti