1 2026:CGHC:18967 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 614 of 2026 Pankaj Kumar Kashyap S/o Shri Ramchandra Kashyap Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Kurushnar, Tehsil And District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chowki Banskot, P S- Vishrampuri, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.04.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 23/2026 registered at Police Station – Vishrampuri, District - Kondagaon, (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m) & 351(3) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that, the prosecutrix aged about 27 years of age lodged the written report that on 7/4/25 the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her on false pretext of marriage and VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.25 11:45:03 +0530 2 thereafter they developed relationship on account of which from 7/4/25 till 11/10/25 sexual relationship was established between them multiple times on pretext of marriage and thereafter on 11/10/25, the applicant refused to marry the prosecutrix and stated that he will not marry her and perform marriage with another girl and threatened to kill her. That, the present matter related to Section 64 of BNS which is a sensitive case and hence. the FIR is not available in online FIR portal of Police Department and hence, the FIR has not been filed. 3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits the the applicant and the prosecutrix solemnized their marriage at Shree Kile Ram Mandir, Itwari Bazar, Dhamtari, which was duly supported by affidavit and subsequently registered on 12.09.2025, and thereafter they resided together as husband and wife; however, due to marital discord, the prosecutrix left the company of the applicant and is now residing with her parents, and with an ulterior motive to harass the applicant, has lodged the present FIR. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is a major, well-educated woman aged about 27 years and was a consenting party to the relationship, and thus no question arises of her consent being vitiated by fraud. The allegations in the FIR itself reveal an unexplained delay of about six months, as the alleged incident is dated 11.10.2025 while the FIR has been lodged in April, which clearly indicates that a matrimonial dispute has been wrongly given the colour of a criminal offence. It is also submitted that the parties were in a relationship for about one year, were fully aware of each other’s status, and their marriage was performed as per Hindu customs; therefore, no offence under Section 64 of the BNS is made 3 out. The applicant is a permanent resident, there is no likelihood of his absconding, and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation, furnish adequate surety, and abide by all conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court; hence, it is prayed that the applicant be granted the benefit of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State, and submits that the applicant, on the pretext of marriage, had sexual relations with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, it appears that the victim, being a major, and the present applicant were known to each other and were in a consensual relationship, during which a physical relationship was established. Thereafter, when the relationship could not culminate in marriage, the present FIR came to be lodged by the victim on the allegation that the applicant refused to marry her. Therefore, without making any further comments on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Pankaj Kumar Kashyap, on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- 4 (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav