2026:CGHC:383 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1545 of 2025 Ashish Kumar Banjare S/o Dilip Kumar Banjare Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 22, Tilda Bajrang Chowk, P.S. Tilda Nevra, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)

... Applicant versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Tilda Nevra, District- Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Xyz Nil ... Respondent(s)

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Applicant : Mr. Arham Siddiqui, Advocate with Mr.

Vivek Anand Samaddar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Ku mar Agrawa l

Order on Board

05/01/2026

1.

The present criminal revision filed by the applicant under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against the order dated 11.06.2025, passed by learned VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur, in Sessions Case No. 94 of VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.13

2025, whereby the charges against the applicant has been framed for the offence under Sections 376(2)(k) and (n), 294 & 323 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, the applicant is an accused in the aforesaid Sessions Case No. 94 of 2025, which is arising out of the Crime No. 589 of 2024, registered at Police Station Tilda-Nevra, District Raipur on the complaint made by the respondent No.2. On 04.12.2024, the complainant lodged a complaint against the applicant that she is working at Khushi Hospital, Raipur since April, 2023, where the applicant was also working. He proposed to her that he would marry her, and despite her protest, he developed a friendship with her. On 05.06.2023, he took her to his house on the pretext of visiting places, where he forcefully made physical relations with her despite her objection and protest. On 26.08.2024, he assured her to marry, and on 09.09.2024, he took her to Arya Samaj Mandir and performed the marriage, but asked her not to disclose the marriage to anyone. On 26.10.2024, when she asked him to take her with him, he started abusing and assaulting her. Thereafter, he switched off his mobile phone, due to which she could not contact him. The police have registered the FIR for the offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 417, 294 & 323 of IPC and after investigation charge sheet was filed before the learned trial Court. On 11.06.2025, the charges were framed against the applicant, which is under challenge in the present criminal revision.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the entire case of prosecution is false and fabricated, and there is no ingredient of any alleged offence. The complainant was the consenting party in the alleged act of 05.06.2023, and she had not made any complaint at that time. It is only when a misunderstanding occurred between them, she lodged the report against the applicant. He would further submit that, from the complaint itself, it transpires that the applicant has married the complainant at Arya Samaj Mandir on 09.09.2024; therefore, there is no ingredient of the offence of rape on the pretext of marriage. The complainant is a major and educated girl having well understanding of her well-being. There is no injury found on the body of the complainant, and therefore, the ingredients of the alleged offences are missing and not sufficient to frame the charge and to proceed with the trial. Therefore, the present criminal revision may be allowed, and the impugned order of framing charge may be set aside, and he may be discharged. He would rely upon the judgment dated 24.11.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Samadhan S/o Sitatram Manmothe v. State of Maharashtra and another” Criminal Appeal No. 5001 of 2025.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and has submitted that there is sufficient and overwhelming evidence against the applicant, which prima facie disclosed the offen