Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:39606 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4944 of 2025 Laxmi Prasad Mistry S/o Rajkumar Mistry Aged About 24 Years R/o Tiwaripur, Dhodatarai, Tahsil - Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) versus ... Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Janu Khare, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 07.08.2025 Order on Board 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 she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 223/2025, registered at Police Station : Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused had visited the complainant’s village for his friend’s wedding, where they became acquainted. The accused took the complainant’s mobile RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 number, and thereafter they began conversing regularly. During the course of their interactions, the accused allegedly proposed marriage to the complainant and subsequently took her to a secluded area (jungle), where he established physical relations with her, which allegedly continued on multiple occasions. It is, however, submitted that the complainant and the accused have known each other for the past five years and have shared a close friendship, even visiting each other’s homes. It is further submitted that the complainant was already married in the year 2023 to another individual, and the accused got married in 2024. Thus, both parties are already married. It is also submitted that the complainant has not been residing with her husband due to strained matrimonial relations and, over time, developed an emotional attachment towards the accused. She allegedly began pressuring the accused to divorce his wife and live with her, and upon his refusal, threatened to falsely implicate him in a criminal case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim is a major girl aged about 23 years, and her statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) goes to show that she was in a relationship and close friendship with the applicant for the past 4–5 years. It is further submitted that the applicant and the victim had physical relations on multiple occasions during the course of their relationship. However, when it came to light that the applicant was already married, differences arose between them, 3 and the relationship became uncordial. He also submits that the present applicant is in jail since 30.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. As per the prosecution case, the applicant induced the complainant into a relationship on the false pretext of marriage, and subsequently established physical relations with her multiple times. It is further submitted that such acts amount to a clear breach of trust and consent, and are punishable under serious provisions of law. The conduct of the applicant in repeatedly exploiting the complainant emotionally and physically reflects a deliberate and manipulative intent. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into account the submission of learned counsel for the parites that the victim is a major girl, aged about 23 years, the relationship between the applicant and the victim was consensual in nature and continued over a span of 4 to 5 years, and further the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS has not denied the long-standing acquaintance and voluntary nature of their 4 association, it appears that the dispute arose only after the victim came to know about the applicant’s marital status, which rendered their relationship uncordial. and the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 30.05.2025, the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Laxmi Prasad Mistry, involved in Crime No. 223/2025, registered at Police Station : Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient 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 her presence, 5 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice