SOHAN CHAUDHRI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010335452026 2026:CGHC:38805

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8034 of 2026
Sohan Chaudhri S/o Shri Nathu Chaudhri Aged About 33 Years R/o
Bijauri, Police Station Mandi Phuti Bodi, District Sehore M.P.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. - Champa,
District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
02.09.2026
1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to
the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
279/2026 registered at Police Station - Champa, District - Janjgir-
Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 &
351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written complaint was
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
lodged by the victim against accused Sohan Chaudhary, alleging
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
that the accused/applicant, who was known to her, forcibly

2
established physical relations with her on 10 February 2024 and
thereafter continued to sexually exploit her on the false promise of
marriage. It is further alleged that, upon the victim coming to know
that the accused was already married and attempting to distance
herself from him, the accused threatened to circulate her obscene
photographs and videos among her relatives and further threatened
to kill her and her family members. During the course of
investigation, the victim was medically examined with the consent of
the victim and her mother, a spot map was prepared, statements of
the witnesses were recorded, and the mobile phone of the accused
was seized. The accused/applicant was arrested on 19 July 2026,
and after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been
filed before the competent Court. Hence, the present bail
application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and
that the allegations levelled against him are false and baseless. It is
further submitted that the applicant and the victim were known to
each other since 2024 and were in a consensual relationship, and
therefore, the allegations do not disclose any forcible or non-
consensual act on the part of the applicant. He further submits that
the applicant has no criminal antecedents and this is the first
offence alleged against him. He also submits that the charge-sheet
has already been filed, he is in jail since 19.07.2026, his continued
incarceration would serve no useful purpose, and the conclusion of
the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular

3
bail to the present applicant.
4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail
application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-
sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the
present case. She further submits that, as per the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, though the
applicant and the victim had initially become acquainted and
remained in contact over telephone, the applicant subsequently
developed a relationship with her on the promise of marriage. It is
submitted that on 10 February 2024, when the applicant visited the
victim’s house, he allegedly established physical relations with her
without her consent, and thereafter, on several occasions, took her
to hotels at Bilaspur and established physical relations with her on
the assurance that he would marry her. It is further submitted that
the victim subsequently came to know through her friend’s
Instagram account that the applicant was already married and had
two children, whereafter she tried to distance herself from him. The
applicant allegedly threatened to circulate her obscene photographs
and videos and also threatened her and her family members with
dire consequences. It is further submitted that the applicant
allegedly threatened the victim’s brother and demanded money,
pursuant to which certain amounts were transferred to the
applicant. Hence, the applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.

4
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and the material
available on record, this Court finds that the applicant and the victim
were known to each other and had been in contact for a
considerable period prior to the alleged incident. The statement of
the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS itself indicates
that the parties had developed friendship and thereafter remained in
a relationship, with the victim admitting that they had been talking
over telephone for a substantial period and that the applicant used
to meet her and they had physical relations on several occasions.
Thus, at this stage, the nature of the relationship between the
parties and the circumstances emerging from the statement of the
victim indicate that the relationship was not a case of a sudden or
isolated occurrence, but was a continuing relationship between the
parties. Further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has
already been submitted in the present case before the competent
Court, he has no previous criminal antecedents, and the present
applicant is in jail since 19.07.2026 and the trial is likely to take
sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the
applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . Let
applicant, Sohan Chaudhri, involved in Crime No. 279/2026
registered at Police Station - Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa,
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 & 351(2) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like

5
amount 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

6
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
Rahul Dewangan