DEVCHAND SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010332352026 2026:CGHC:38696
NAFR
MANPREET
KAUR
Digitally signed
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2026.09.01
15:41:03 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7950 of 2026
Devchand Singh S/o Somarsai Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Sonpur
(Barpara), Police Chowki Basdei, Police Station And District - Surajpur
(C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Chowki
Basdei, Police Station Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01.09.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection
with Crime No. 512/2026, registered at Police Station- Surajpur,
District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section
64 of the BNS.

2
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.07.2026, the
victim/complainant lodged a written report alleging that on
06.07.2026, at about 6:00 p.m., while she was proceeding from
her house towards the farm, the present applicant, who was
standing near the door of his house, forcibly took her inside his
house and committed sexual intercourse with her without her
consent. On the basis of the said report, an FIR was registered
against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 64
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During investigation, the
applicant was arrested on 14.07.2026 and, upon completion of the
investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due
to previous enmity between the families of the applicant and the
victim. It is further submitted that the victim is a major woman and,
considering the circumstances of the alleged incident, including
that it allegedly took place at about 6:00 p.m. in the applicant’s
house where other family members resided and which is situated
in a densely inhabited locality, the allegations are doubtful. It is
also contended that the victim did not raise any alarm during the
alleged incident and that the medical examination did not reveal
any signs of recent sexual intercourse or any external or internal
injury on her private parts, which, according to the learned
counsel, supports the applicant’s case. The applicant has been in

3
custody since 14.07.2026, the charge-sheet has already been
filed, charges are yet to be framed, and the trial is likely to take
considerable time, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.
4.
Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and
submits that there are specific and serious allegations against the
applicant of having forcibly committed sexual intercourse with the
victim without her consent. It is further submitted that the offence
alleged against the applicant is grave and serious in nature and,
considering the nature of allegations and the material collected
during the course of investigation, no case for grant of bail is
made out. Therefore, it is prayed that the present bail application
be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that
the victim is a major woman, the submissions advanced by the
learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the medical
evidence, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed
and, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no
longer required, as also taking into consideration that the
applicant is in judicial custody since 14.07.2026 and the
conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be
enlarged on bail. Without commenting upon the merits of the

4
case, the present bail application is allowed .
7. Let applicant, Devchand Singh , involved in Crime No. 512/2026,
registered at Police Station- Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for
the offence punishable under Section 64 of the 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:-
(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
them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person,

5
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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Manpreet