Suresh Kumar Nagwanshi vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6104 Chatt

                                      1


             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                          MCRCA No. 1151 of 2022

Suresh Kumar Nagwanshi S/o Shri Vibhishan Nagvanshi Aged About 30 Years
Working As A Constable At C.G. Armed Forces, Permanent R/o Village -
Pendrawan Police Station - Sankra, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) Presently
Posted At Police Camp, Mohgaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

                                                                ---- Applicant

                                  Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Patewa, District : Mahasamund,
Chhattisgarh

                                                             ---- Respondent



For Applicant             :     Shri Vaibahv A. Goverdhan, Advocate.
For Respondents/State     :     Shri Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer.

                   Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi
                                Order on Board
29/09/2022

   1. Heard.

   2. The applicant has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory
      bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. as he apprehends his arrest in
      connection with Crime No.184/2022, registered at Police Station
      Patewa, District: Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable
      under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.

   3. Facts

of the case in brief are that the applicant and complainant came in contact through facebook and they entered into love affair. On the pretext of marriage, the applicant sexually exploited her from 16-03-2018 to 08-07-2022. Later on, the applicant refused to marry her, hence, FIR was lodged by the complainant against the present applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the complainant is a working lady, aged about 27 years and the applicant

is also adult person, aged about 30 years. They were having love affair for about four years and also made physical relation with the consent of each other, therefore, it is not a case of rape. It is further submitted that the applicant was ready to marry with complainant. But later on, he came to know that earlier she was in relation with some other person also and she has lodged FIR bearing Crime No.79/2017 at P.S. Tendukona, Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC against that person, wherein charge sheet of that case had filed by the police, which was pending as Sessions Trial No.75/2017 (State V/s Dhansingh). After trial, that person was acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Mahasamund (C.G.). Moreover, complainant had admitted that accused i.e. Dhansingh has kept her as a wife. She has also admitted that Dhansingh gave divorce to his wife, as per their social custom. It is next submitted that, due to all the aforementioned facts, the present applicant denied to marry with complainant. The applicant has filed Certified copy of FIR/Crime No.79/2017 registered at P.S Tendukona, Mahasamund (C.G.), statement of complainant recorded under 164 of the Cr.P.C. and also judgment passed in Sessions Trial No.75/2017, hence, he is entitled for benefit of anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant.

6. Considered the submission, perused the case diary and material available on record.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having considering the facts situation of the case, considering the long consensual relationship between the parties and also taking into consideration the certified copies of various documents of Sessions Trial No.75/2017 ,I feel inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

8. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be

released on anticipatory bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the following conditions:-

(i) that he shall cooperate with investigation and shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(iii) that he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

(iv) that he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Certified copy as per rules.

SD/-

(N.K.Chandravanshi) Judge Amardeep