Rakesh Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 451 Chatt

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 451 Chatt
Judgement Date : 13 March, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Rakesh Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                 1




                                                                 2026:CGHC:12156
                                                                               NAFR

                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                     MCRCA No. 385 of 2026

             Rakesh Kumar Sahu S/o Jagdish Prasad Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o
             Permanent Resident Of Village Gidha, P.S.- Semra, Tehsil- Janjgir
             District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), Present Address- R/o Pathripara Ward
             No.-17, Korba P.S.- Rampur, Tehsil And District Korba C.G. Aadhaar No.-
             779259663790
                                                                          ... Applicant
                                              versus
             State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Baradwar, District- Sakti
             (C.G.)
                                                                     ... Non-applicant
             For Applicant                   : Mr. Sumit Jhawar, Advocate.
             For Non-applicant/State         : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer
                             Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
                                         Order on Board

            13.03.2026

             1.

This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the

Bhartiya Nagarik Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who

is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 24/2026

registered at Police Station - Baradwar, District- Sakti (C.G.) for the

offence punishable under Sections 75, 296, 351(2) and 332(C) of

the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhtia, 2023.

RAHUL DEWANGAN

Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN

2. As per prosecution story in brief is that on 11.01.2026 at about

11:00 AM, the present accused/applicant allegedly entered the

house of the victim and expressed that he loved her and wanted to

marry her. It is further alleged that the accused forcibly pulled the

victim towards himself and attempted to outrage her modesty. The

accused is also alleged to have threatened the victim with dire

consequences, including threatening to kill her. On the basis of the

said allegations, an offence has been registered against the present

applicant. Hence, this anticipatory bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is

innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is

submitted that the case is based on false and fabricated allegations,

as the applicant and the complainant have known each other for the

last three to four years and had first come in contact through

Facebook, after which they used to communicate regularly over

mobile phone. It is further submitted that the complainant herself

had invited the applicant to her house and had provided him with

the address of her grandparents' house at Baradwar over the

phone. However, when the family members of the complainant

came to know about their love affair, the present false FIR was

lodged under pressure from the family. It is also submitted that there

is an unexplained delay of about nine days in lodging the FIR, which

clearly indicates that the complaint has been filed as an afterthought

and with a malafide intention. He further submits that the present

applicant and the victim were in a consensual relationship for last

three to four years. He further submits that the present applicant

has no criminal antecedents. Therefore he prays for grant of

anticipatory bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the

non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the

applicant and submits that the present applicant has committed a

serious offence. It is argued that the applicant unlawfully entered the

house of the victim, attempted to outrage her modesty by forcibly

pulling her towards himself, and also threatened her with dire

consequences. Therefore he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory

bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

diary.

6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case and further the

fact that victim, who is a major girl, and the present applicant have

known each other for the last three to four years and had first come

in contact through Facebook, after which they used to communicate

regularly over mobile phone. Further the fact that when the family

members of the victim came to know about their love affair, the

present false FIR was lodged under pressure from the family.

Further they were in a consensual relationship and she was a

consenting party. Therefore, without commenting anything on

merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

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

the event of arrest of the applicant - Rakesh Kumar Sahu, 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) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be

prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

(c) The applicant 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 her

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.