Ritik Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station

: Mr. Dharmesh Srivastava, Advocate : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PL Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 29/10/2025

1. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2

2. This revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 438/442 of the BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved by the impugned order dated

08.08.2025 and framing of charges dated 28.08.2025 under Section 64(2) (m){wrongly mentioned as (M) in the impugned charge-sheet dated

28.08.2025} of BNS, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n){wrongly mentioned as (N) in the impugned charge-sheet dated 28.08.2025}of IPC in alternate Section 81 of BNS, 2023 in Sessions Trial No.25/2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.).

3. Brief facts of this case are that the victim/prosecutrix lodged a report in Police Station Mahila Thana Kawardha, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) on

03.02.2025 alleging inter-alia that she acquainted. with the present applicant since her childhood. It is alleged that the present applicant is working in CRPF and posted at Avantikapur Pulwama. It is further alleged that in the month of July, 2023, she came into contact with the present applicant and thereafter she started conversation with him through mobile phone. It is further alleged that on 22.11.2023, the present applicant performed marriage with the prosecutrix/victim in Siddhi Mata Mandir at Bemetara in presence of her two friends and thereafter made physical relationship with her in the rental house of the victim. It is further alleged that in the month of December, 2023, the present applicant called the victim to Kashi Vishvanath where she was taken to Alkanda Hotel and the present applicant made physical 3 relationship with her. It is further alleged that on 20.12.2023, the present applicant again performed marriage with her on the bank of holy river Ganga in Kashi Vishwanath and told her that in the month of March when he came on leave then perform court marriage with her. It is further alleged that in the month of March, the present applicant came to village on leave and on request of marriage by the victim, the present applicant started procrastinating. It is further alleged that the victim disclosed her through mobile phone regarding her pregnancy then the present applicant abused her told for abortion. It is further alleged that on

20.10.2024 the victim went to Rupjeevan Hospital as she was having bleeding, she was disclosed by the doctor that there is a miscarriage. It is further alleged that the present applicant stopped conversation with the victim and as and when he come on mobile phone then the victim was misbehaved by the present applicant as he started abusing her and refused to court marriage with her. On the basis of written report preferred by the victim/prosecutrix, the police registered an offence bearing Crime No. 09/2025 for the offence punishable under section 64(2)(m), 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and investigation was initiated.

4. During course of investigation, the prosecutrix was sent to District Hospital, Kawardha, District Kabirdham for medical examination, her statement under section 183 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 4 2023 was recorded on 27.02.2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kawardha, Kabirdham (C.G.), articles were seized, statements of the witnesses were recorded, the present applicant was formally arrested as he was granted anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court and after completion of the entire investigation, Charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) on 09.04.2025. The case is triable by the learned Sessions Judge, therefore, the Criminal Case No. 1564/2025 was committed vide order dated 11.04.2025 and after being transferred the Session Trial No. 25/2025 was placed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.).

5. The present applicant, during course investigation, preferred an application under section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail before this Court which was registered as MCRCA No. 290 of 2025 and taken up for hearing on 03.03.2025 and this Court has been pleased to pass an order to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant and the instant petition was allowed.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC), Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) erred in framing of charges under Section 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code and in alternate section 5 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against the present applicant, which is not according to law. The learned Trial Court i.e. learned Additional District Sessions Judge (FTC), Kawardha, Kabirdham (C.G.) erred in considering the documents and facts and circumstances of the case which clearly shows that no offence has been committed by the present applicant as both the parties are well educated and the relationship was made between them with consent of both the parties for about 01 year and such relationship does not attract the ingredients of Section 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code. He further contended that the present applicant has not committed an offence under Section 64(2) (m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code or section 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Even if the entire case of the prosecution is taken as it is, no offence under Section 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code or section 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 could be made out on plain reading of the FIR and entire charge-sheet and material collected by the prosecution. The FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law, therefore, the present applicant deserves to be discharged and the entire Sessions Trial No. 25/2025 is liable to be quashed and the present applicant is entitled to be discharged from the offences under Section 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of 6 Indian Penal Code or section 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He further contended that the prosecutrix was aged about 24 years at the time of filing of written report and the present applicant is also aged about 25 years and allegedly they came into contact and acquainted each other since last 12 years and thereafter physical relationship was made between the parties at various places and the last relationship was made between the parties on 11.11.2024 in a rental house at Darripara and the report was lodged on 13.02.2025 against the present applicant, therefore, the allegation that on the pretext of marriage she was sexually exploited by the present applicant since last about 01 year seems to be false and baseless. Even if the entire case of the prosecutrix/complainant is taken as it is no offence under Section 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code or section 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is made out. Neither forcibly sexual intercourse nor physical relationship without consent of the prosecutrix was made by the present applicant. Thus no offence under Section 64(2) (m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or Section 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code or section 81 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 would be made out against the present applicant.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State-respondent supports impugned order and submits that impugned order is well merited and has been passed after considering the entire material available on record 7 therefore, it is not a case to set aside of the impugned order, hence, the same may be dismissed.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties, the impugned orders passed by the Courts below and other material available on record with utmost circumspection.

9. Considering the facts of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the parties. On bare perusal of the record, it is prima facie visible that the applicant has made physical relation with the victim on the pretext of marriage. By convincing the victim that he would marry her in the Court, the applicant continued to have physical relations with the victim. Prima facie, elements of crime are present against the accused.

10. Prima facie it reveals that offence under Section 64(2)(m) of BNS, 2023 is made out against the applicant, therefore, it is clear that the trial Court has not committed any error in framing the charge against the accused.

11. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that there is no illegality and infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court and there is no any ground to set aside the impugned order and discharge from the charges.

12. Accordingly, the instant revision is hereby dismissed and disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant