1 2026:CGHC:18733 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3715 of 2026 Rikesh Lautre Son Of Bijendra Lautre Aged About 27 Years Resident Of Village Rengakathera, P.S. Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.23/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2) (K) & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant has lodged VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.23 17:53:48 +0530 2 report the concerned police station that as per FIR on 13.01.2026 at about 5.00 p.m. the victim and Kanshiram Jangade went to Madai Mela, they were consumed liquor and committed subject offences thereafter, Kanshiram Jangade met with the present applicant at Madai Mela and stated dropped to the victim at their house, thereafter, the victim's sister lodged FIR for the offence punishable under section 64(2) (k), 3(5) of B.N.S. against the present applicant and others accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted that the applicant, the victim, and the main accused Kashiram Jangade were all working at ABIS Poultry Farm, due to which they were known to each other. The applicant neither consumed liquor nor committed any alleged offence, and the allegations, if any, are primarily against the main accused. The applicant merely accompanied the victim and dropped her at her house, without any knowledge of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the victim, being a major, was aware of her actions, and the applicant had no role in the alleged occurrence. The prosecution story is false, baseless, and concocted, and the applicant has been implicated without any proper inquiry or credible material on record, as no prima facie case is made out against him. The applicant has been in custody since 15.01.2026, and his continued detention would adversely affect the livelihood of his family members. He is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title and there is no likelihood of his absconding, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183, and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the applicant has been in custody since 15.01.2026, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let applicant, Rikesh Lautre, involved in Crime No.23/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2) (K) & 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 4 her counsel. In case of her 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 him 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 her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav