Mohd. Surfaraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1694 Chatt

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1694 Chatt
Judgement Date : 15 April, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Mohd. Surfaraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 April, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                           1




                                                                                2026:CGHC:17249
                                                                                         NAFR

                                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                              MCRCA No. 365 of 2026

                   Mohd. Surfaraj S/o Marhum Mohd. Riyaz Khan Aged About 29 Years R/o-
                   Near Muslim Hall, Rda Colony, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)       ...Applicant


VAIBHAV
SINGH
                                                         versus
Digitally signed
by VAIBHAV
SINGH
                   State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Civil
Date: 2026.04.16


                   Lines, District Raipur (C.G.)                                  ...Non-applicant
12:04:26 +0530




                   For Applicant                   : Mr. Sachin Nidhi along with MD. Zakir Anam
                                                     Shah, Advocate.
                   For Non-Applicant/State         : Mr. Sourabh Sahu Panel Lawyer.


                                    Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
                                                    Order on Board


                   15.04.2026

                      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. 418/2025

registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the

offences punishable under Section 69 of the BNS.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that, the prosecutrix and present

applicant came into contact through the Instagram in the year 2021

and from that point time, friendly relationship has been developed

between both of them. After that, in the year 2024 the prosecutrix has

started work at Flora Spa Center, where the present applicant has

committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on 19.09.2024 on

the pretext of marriage, but the present applicant has denied for the

marriage with the prosecutrix, even after the repeated request made

by the prosecutrix. On the basis of the aforesaid story of the

prosecution Offence U/s 69 of B.N.S. in crime no.418/2025 at Police

Station-Civil Lines (C (CG) has been registered against the present

applicant.

3. The applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely

implicated in the present case. He further submits the learned trial

court failed to appreciate that prior intimation dated 28.07.2025 had

already been submitted by the applicant before the higher police

authorities, apprehending that a false case may be lodged against him

by the prosecutrix, and a copy of the said intimation has been

annexed as Annexure A/2. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is

a major and a consenting party, which has not been duly considered

by the trial court. The FIR has been registered solely on the basis of a

false complaint made by the prosecutrix without proper verification.

Even if the entire prosecution story is taken at its face value, no

offence is made out against the applicant, particularly in view of the

unexplained delay of approximately one year in lodging the FIR. The

circumstances clearly indicate that false allegations have been

levelled only to mentally harass the applicant. It is also pertinent that

the prosecutrix had earlier pressured the applicant to marry her, and

upon his refusal, she threatened to falsely implicate him in a criminal

case, which fact was duly intimated to the authorities in advance. The

applicant reserves the right to raise additional grounds and place

further documents at the time of arguments. The applicant is a

permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, and

there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the

prosecution evidence. He is ready to furnish adequate security and

undertakes to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this

Hon'ble Court while granting 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 learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of

the allegations levelled against the applicant, it appears that the

victim, being a major, and the present applicant were known to each

other and were in a consensual relationship, during which a physical

relationship was established. Thereafter, when the relationship could

not culminate in marriage, the present FIR came to be lodged by the

victim on the allegation that the applicant refused to marry her.

Therefore, without making any further comments on the merits of the

case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present

applicant.

7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in

the event of arrest of the applicant - Mohd. Surfaraj, on executing a

personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the

arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following

conditions:-

(a) 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 fact to the Court.

(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

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

(d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.