1 2026:CGHC:18995 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2522 of 2026 1. Ravichand Persiya S/o Ramcharitra Aged About 44 Years R/o Vill. Bharuhibans, P.S. Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2. Tejmani S/o Madan Lal Goutam Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Rameshpur, P.S. Raghunathnagar, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Out Post Wadrufnagar, Police Station Basantpur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.04.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 09/2026 registered at Police Station – Basantpur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1) and Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that on 18.01.2026, the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.27 17:21:20 +0530 2 accused called the victim to Wadrafnagar at around 06:00 a.m. on the pretext of providing her with a job. The victim went to Wadrafnagar, after which the accused took her to a room and called two of his friends there, along with liquor. The accused and his friends consumed liquor and also forced the victim to consume it. Thereafter, all three of them allegedly raped her one by one. The matter was reported to the police station, and on the basis of such report, the police registered the aforesaid FIR and arrested the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that even if the entire prosecution story is accepted as it is, no case is made out against the applicants. He also submits that the applicants have not committed any act which falls within the purview of the offences alleged against them. The entire case of the prosecution is false, fabricated, and concocted. He further submits that the prosecution story is inherently unbelievable, and the alleged incident is highly improbable in the facts and circumstances mentioned in the complaint. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Court does not contain any allegation against the present applicants. He submits that the medical report also does not support the prosecution case and is negative. He submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 20.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants, and submits that the prosecution case clearly reveals that the accused persons, in furtherance of a common intention, lured the victim to Wadrafnagar on the false pretext of providing employment, thereby demonstrating premeditated deceit. Upon 3 her arrival, she was taken to a secluded room where the accused, along with his associates namely, Deepak Kushwaha, consumed liquor and forcibly administered the same to the victim, rendering her vulnerable and incapable of resistance. Thereafter, all three accused persons committed gang rape upon her in a sequential manner, constituting a grave and heinous offence. The FIR was lodged without undue delay, and the victim’s statement remains consistent and inspires prima facie confidence. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the manner of commission of the offence, and the likelihood of the accused influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence if released, no ground for leniency is made out, and thus, the present applicants are not entitled to be grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the allegations against the present applicants are grave and serious in nature, further, the material on record prima facie indicates that the applicants, in furtherance of a common intention, lured the victim on the false pretext of employment and thereafter subjected her to sexual assault after rendering her incapable of resistance. The FIR has been lodged promptly and the statement of the victim appears consistent at this stage, lending credibility to the prosecution case. Further, looking to the nature and manner of the offence, as well as the possibility of the applicants influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of regular bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Ravichand Persiya and Tejmani, involved in Crime No. 09/2026 registered at Police Station 4 – Basantpur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 70(1) and Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned 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 Abhishek