2025:CGHC:15907 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2181 of 2025 1. Anup Toppo S/o Ramnath Toppo Aged About 19 Years R/o Ghughrikhurd, P/s- Shankargarh, Distt. Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Police Station- Shankargarh, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ....Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. K.P. Gupta, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 04.04.2025 1. This is second application for grant of regular bail to applicant. First bail application bearing M.Cr.C. No.3172/2024 has been dismssed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.5.2024. 2. Applicant is in custody since 2.3.2024 in connection with Crime No.33/2024 registered at Police Station Shankargarh, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Rakhi Tirkey (since deceased) was residing with applicant as husband-wife which ultimately resulted in conceiving a child by her. On refusal by said Rakhi to leave the house of applicant, he started harassing her mentally and physically and used to give threats to her that he would make his obscene video viral in social media platform. Unable to bear with the constant threats and harassment meted out by applicant, she committed suicide by consuming pesticide. Based on aforementioned allegation, the instant crime is registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 2.3.2024. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that there was no instigation or abetment on the part of applicant which compelled the deceased to commit suicide. There is no material to show that applicant has prepared or made viral any obscene video of deceased Rakhi Tirkey. There was no dispute between applicant and deceased as alleged by parents of deceased. Allegations levelled against applicant are absolutely false and baseless. Charge sheet has been filed, there is no criminal antecedent of applicant, he is in jail since 2.3.2024, therefore, he be enlarged on regular bail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the submissions of learned counsel for applicant and submits that in the statement of victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 CrPC there is specific allegation against this applicant of harassment and threats. Hence, applicant is not entitled to bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations levelled; submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and period of pre-trial detention of applicant, without commenting anything on merit, I am inclined to grant privilege of bail to applicant. Accordingly, this second bail of application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that; a) he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each & every date unless exempted from appearance. b) he shall not, in any manner, tamper with prosecution witnesses. c) If he is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/- SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI