Anticipatory bail may be granted when a physical relationship is found to be consensual and the allegation of a false promise of marriage appears to be a consequence of a failed romantic relationship rather than deceitful inducement from the inception.

Order on Board

1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.166/2026 registered at Police Station – Saraswati Nagar, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under

Digitally signed by KRISHNA KRISHNA KUMAR KUMAR BARVE BARVE Date: 2026.08.26 14:15:11 +0530

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a written complaint was filed by the complainant before P.S. Saraswati Nagar, Raipur on 02.08.2026, wherein she alleged that she came in contact with Hem Singh Rajput through Facebook in November 2025, and during their conversation she alleged that, applicant assured her that applicant would marry her. It is further alleged that, on 12.11.2025, they started communicating regularly regarding marriage. Thereafter, applicant sent his sister Hemlata with the complainant to Ujjain on 01.12.2025, stating that she should know his sister well. After darshan, they returned towards Raipur and reached Tatibandh Chowk on 06.12.2025, where applicant received them and took the complainant to his house. Thereafter, on 07.12.2025, applicant took the complainant to Wennington Court, Raipur, where he stayed with her and continued the relationship on the assurance of marriage. The complainant further alleged that marriage between them was subsequently finalised, and she visited Ujjain with applicant and his mother in April 2026 and stayed at his house for about 15 days in June 2026. She also alleged that, when she informed applicant on 25.07.2026 about her pregnancy and requested him to marry her, he refused to marry her and thereafter allegedly pressurised and threatened her to terminate the pregnancy. On the bases of aforesaid complaint an FIR No. 166/2026 dated 6/08/2026 has been registered by the police station Saraswati Nagar under section 69 of BNS 2023 against the applicant. Hence, the bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that allegations levelled against the applicant are vague, omnibus and devoid of material particulars. Prima facie case not made out against the applicant, that the present case arises out of a consensual love relationship between the applicant and the complainant, and there was no deceitful or fraudulent intention on the part of the applicant from the very inception of the relationship. The essential ingredients of Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are not attracted merely because a relationship subsequently failed to culminate in marriage. The relation between the present applicant and complainant became sour with the time which culminated into registration of FIR. The applicant never induced the complainant into the relationship by making a false promise of marriage with no intention of fulfilling the same. The allegations have been made with an intention to give a criminal colour to an otherwise consensual love affair. On 12.11.2025, the applicant and the complainant came into contact with each other through the social media platform Facebook, and their acquaintance gradually developed into a romantic relationship. The complainant, being a resident of District Korba, Chhattisgarh, frequently visited the applicant's residence despite the distance of approximately 250 kilometres between them. The relationship between the parties was known to their respective families, which further demonstrates that the relationship was neither clandestine nor founded upon any deceitful representation. During the period of their acquaintance and relationship, the applicant never concealed any material fact from the complainant and had clearly apprised his personal circumstances. The applicant did not make any false promise of marriage with a dishonest intention from the inception of the relationship. Despite the circumstances