2026:CGHC:2749 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 91 of 2026 Krishna Dev Shyam S/o Vijay Shyam Aged About 24 Years R/o Village-

Chinpuri, Badrapara, Korbi, P.S. Pasan District- Korba (C.G.)

...Applicant VAIBHAV SINGH DVD17 Ai a g :tI 5 i eBt 2: aH :2 l 0 A0 y 9 V 2 s + 6 iSg .0 I0 n 5 N1 e 3 G. d 10 H6 by versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pasaan District Korba (C.G.)

...Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Sheelu Diwan, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

16.01.2026

1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 221/2025 registered at Police Station – Pasaan District Korba (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 69 of the BNS.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Crime No. 221/2025 has been registered against the accused under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly sexually exploiting the victim for the past five years by inducing her with a false promise of marriage. It is the case of the prosecution that the offences alleged are serious in nature and pertain to crimes against women, which are on the rise in the area. The investigation is still in progress and has not yet been completed. It is further alleged that prior to the registration of the present offence, the victim had lodged a complaint on 25.10.2025 at Police Lines, Rampur, under Sections 296 and 351(2) of the BNS, stating that the accused had threatened to make her obscene video viral and had abused her. According to the prosecution, this earlier complaint lends support to the credibility of the victim and shows that the allegations made by her in the present case cannot be termed as false or fabricated. The prosecution further apprehends that if the accused is granted anticipatory bail at this stage, there is a likelihood of his influencing the victim and prosecution witnesses or absconding, which may adversely affect the investigation. Considering the gravity of the offence, the nature of the allegations and the stage of investigation, the prosecution contends that this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

3. The applicant submits that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and the prosecution case is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, rendering the evidence collected during investigation insufficient to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The applicant reiterates the settled principle of law that every accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and denial of bail at this stage would amount to pre-trial punishment, which is contrary to the spirit of justice. The applicant undertakes not to tamper with evidence or influence any witness and assures this Hon’ble Court that he is a law-abiding citizen with deep roots in society, with no likelihood of absconding. He further undertakes to remain present during trial and to comply with all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, and is ready to furnish adequate surety for the same. It is also submitted that the applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family and his continued detention is causing severe hardship to his dependents, and moreover, his health condition requires regular medical attention which may not be adequately ensured in custody. In these circumstances, the applicant humbly prays that he may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel appearing for the non-

applicant/State, and submits that the applicant, on the pretext of marriage, had sexual relations with the victim, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail.

5. I have heard l