[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Mahendra Banjare vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:15862
VAISHALI
LUCKY NAFR
NAGARIA
Digitally signed by
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
VAISHALI LUCKY
NAGARIA
Date: 2026.04.07
16:58:16 +0530
MCRC No. 3103 of 2026
• Mahendra Banjare S/o Mohar Ram Banjare, Aged About 35 Years
Caste Satnami, R/o Village Churtela, P.S. And Tahsil Dabhara,
District Sakti (Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Dabhara,
District Sakti (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
07.04.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
49/2026, registered at Police Station-Dabhara, District - Sakti (C.G.)
for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that in the month of October 2025
the prosecutrix with her husband and children gone to Punjab for
working in brick kiln where the present applicant is contractor
during this period the prosecutrix and present applicant talk to each
other and December, 2025 she returned back to her village. On
28.12.2025 at about 12 PM when prosecutrix was alone at her house
at that time the present applicant entered the house and raped her
first time and threten her thereafter on 09.01.2026 at about 2.30 PM
again raped her at that time the husband of the prosecutrx came to
the house and thereafter on 11.02.2026 written complaint moved by
the prosecutrix and on the basis of said complaint FIR No. 49/2026
under section 64(1) of BNS has been registered against the present
applicant and during the course of investigation applicant was
arrested on 11.02.2026 and after completion of investigation challan
was filed. Hence, this application.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that
applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present
case. It is further argued that victim is married lady and having
children. He also submits that applicant and victim were used to talk
each other and in a relationship, when the said fact came into
knowledge to the husband of the victim, she lodged FIR against the
victim. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the
present case and applicant is in jail since 11.02.2026. Therefore, the
applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application of the applicant and submits that the victim had gone to
work at a brick kiln in Punjab along with her husband and children,
where the present applicant served as the contractor. During this
period, interactions took place between the victim and the present
applicant, and in December 2025, she returned to her village. On
December 28, 2025, at approximately 12:00 PM, while the victim was
alone at her home, the present applicant barged into the house,
raped her for the first time, and threatened her. Subsequently, on
January 9, 2026, at approximately 2:30 PM, he raped her again; at
that moment, the victim's husband arrived home. Thereafter, on
February 11, 2026, a written complaint was lodged by the victim.
Therefore, he is not entitiled for grant of regular bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the State and perused the materials
available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and
gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant and period of
detention in jail, further the fact that the victim is a major lady and
there was some relationship made between the applicant and the
victim, and thereafter, a consensual sexual relationship was
established between both of them, when the said fact came into
knowledge to the husband of the victim, hence, she filed the FIR and
she is the consenting party, also the fact that the charge-sheet has
been filed in the present case, the applicant is in jail since
11.02.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long
time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to
be released on bail in this case.
7. Let applicant - Mahendra Banjare involved in Crime No.49/2026,
registered at Police Station-Dabhara, District - Sakti (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the
court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the
effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the
dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are
present in court. In case of default of this condition,
it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse
of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with
law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through
his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient
cause, the trial court may proceed against him under
Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure his presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued
and the applicant fails to appear before the court on
the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial
court shall initiate proceedings against him, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person,
before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening
of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of
statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the
opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is
deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be
open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse
of liberty of bail and proceed against him in
accordance with law.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Vaishali
