39 +0530 • Ravi Singh Bhadauria S/o Gaukaran Bhadauria Aged About 32 Years At v. • State Of Chhattisgarh Through P/s Ganj, District- Raipur, C.G
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:22449 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4149 of 2025 SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.05.29 17:59:39 +0530 • Ravi Singh Bhadauria S/o Gaukaran Bhadauria Aged About 32 Years At Kanawar, P S Umri, District Bhind, M.P., Present At- Hemu Nagar, Torwa P S Torwa District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through P/s Ganj, District- Raipur, C.G. ... Non-Applicant/State For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate For Non- Applicant/State : Mrs. Pragya Shrivastava, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.05.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 97/2025 registered at Police Station – Ganj, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 64 (2), 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the prosecutrix being a mature 2 and married lady lodged a written complaint before the concerned PS stating that she get acquainted with the applicant in year 2016-17 whereafter friendly relations were developed between them leading to telephonic communications. From a perusal of the written complaint as well as the impugned order it is discernible that since year 2019 till 2024 for last more than 5 years there was consensual relations between the applicant and the prosecutrix. Adhering to such written complaint the captioned FIR was lodged against the applicant under aforementioned sections whereafter the applicant was arrested on 11.04.2025 and since then for last more than a month the applicant is in judicial custody. During investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix and the other relevant witnesses have been recorded therefore there is no apprehension of tampering the witnesses and the interrogation against the accused is not required hence keeping the applicant incarcerated would not serve any fruitful result. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely been implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the victim is major girl, she was having love affair with applicant for five years, which shows that she was a consenting party. He would also submit that there are 5 years of delay in lodging the FIR. He further submits that the first cohabitation between the prosecutrix and the applicant took place way back in the year 2016- 17 and the present complainant has been lodged an FIR after an inordinate delay. He contends that the applicant has no criminal 3 antecedents and he is in jail since 11.04.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant. She submits that applicant/accused had established physical relationship with victim on multiple occasions on the pretext of marriage and later on, refused to marry her, he also assaulted the victim, 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, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material available in case diary, also considering the fact that victim is major girl and she was a consenting party, she had been in consensual relationship with the applicant for about four years and when their relationship could not be materialized, she lodged the present FIR against the applicant with the intention to harass him and without further commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court find it appropriate to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Ravi Singh Bhadauria involved in Crime No. 97/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, District Raipur (C.G.) under Sections 64 (2), 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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, 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, if there is no legal impediment. 5 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 $iddhant