Facts
The applicant filed a first anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 43/2026 for offences under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Source reference: para 1The prosecution alleged that between June 15, 2022, and February 7, 2026, the applicant repeatedly engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim on the pretext of marriage, but subsequently refused to marry her.
Source reference: para 2The applicant contended that the victim is a major, the relationship was consensual, and the marriage could not proceed because both parties belong to the same patronymic (Goutra), leading to family opposition.
Source reference: para 3Issues
Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, in light of the consensual nature of the long-term relationship.
Source reference: para 1, 6Law Applied
Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the discretionary power to grant anticipatory bail.
Source reference: para 1Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which pertains to sexual intercourse on the basis of a false promise to marry.
Source reference: para 1The court took into account the evidentiary value of the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS.
Source reference: para 4, 6Reasoning
The court examined the facts and circumstances, specifically noting the gravity of the offence versus the nature of the relationship.
Source reference: para 6It observed that the victim is a major and was a "consenting party" throughout a relationship that spanned nearly four years.
Source reference: para 6The court noted that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS confirmed a long-term love relationship.
Source reference: para 4The court accepted the applicant’s argument that the refusal to marry stemmed from social/family constraints (the same 'Goutra') rather than initial deceit.
Source reference: para 3Considering that the investigation and trial would likely be prolonged, the court found the applicant’s liberty outweighed the necessity of custodial interrogation.
Source reference: para 6Holding
The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application.
The court directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and one surety to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to several conditions, including that the applicant must not threaten witnesses, must appear for all trial dates, must provide verified identification (Aadhaar), and must not involve himself in similar future offences.
Source reference: para 7Original Court PDF
DINESH RAJWADEvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in