1 2026:CGHC:13180 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2585 of 2026 Pratap Haldar S/o Shri Haran Haldar Aged About 21 Years R/o Village - Vidhayarnagar, P.V. -42 Pakhanjur, Thana - Pakhanjur, District - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Durgukondal, Distt - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shreya Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.03.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 48/2025, registered at Police Station Durgukondal, Distt - North Bastar Kanker (CG) for the offence 2 punishable under Sections 64(1), 351(2), of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 18.12.2025 at about 02:30 PM, the applicant/accused allegedly took the victim to a secluded place near Hahaladdi Pahadi Temple, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Durgukondal, and by threatening and intimidating her, forcibly established physical relations against her will and consent. It is further alleged that the accused also threatened the victim with dire consequences, including threat to life, if she disclosed the incident to anyone. On the basis of the complaint, offence was registered, the accused was arrested, and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that the FIR has been lodged after a delay of three days from the date of the alleged incident, which gives rise to a reasonable inference that the same is an afterthought with a view to falsely implicate the present applicant in the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 22.12.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 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 before the competent Court. He further submits 3 that the applicant is alleged to have forcibly committed rape upon the victim at a secluded place by threatening her and further extended threats to kill her if she disclosed the incident, the husband of the victim was out of station at the relevant time and upon his return, the alleged incident was disclosed to him, and thereafter the present FIR came to be lodged after a delay of 03 days from the date of the alleged incident. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that on 18.12.2025 at about 02:30 PM, he took the victim to a secluded place near Hahaladdi Pahadi Temple and, by threatening and intimidating her, forcibly established physical relations with her against her will and without her consent and after the commission of the offence, the applicant extended threats to the victim to not disclose the incident to anyone, failing which he would kill her, so far as delay of 3 days are concerned, the husband of the victim was out of station at the relevant time and upon his return, the alleged incident was disclosed to him, and thereafter the present FIR came to be lodged after a delay of 03 days from the date of the alleged incident, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of 4 the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Pratap Haldar, involved in Crime No. 48/2025, registered at Police Station Durgukondal, Distt - North Bastar Kanker (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 351(2), of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 Akhil