Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20927 (CHH)

GAJANAND KHOOTE v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/649/2025 · 2025-06-09

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:22905 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 649 of 2025 1 - Gajanand Khoote S/o Sudharam Khoonte Aged About 23 Years R/o Village - Kirari Godhi, P.S. - Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Soni, Advocate For State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer For Objector Mr. Neeraj Baghel, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/06/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.0142/2025 registered at Police Station – Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections – 85, 115(2), 296, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per Case of the prosecution, the present applicant is the husband of the complainant, who is alleges dowry harassment, physical/mental abuse, and threats by the applicant and co- VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.06.19 11:09:22 +0530 2 accused. The couple married three years ago under Hindu Customs. On written report by complainant the alleged offences has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the present FIR is a vexatious and retaliatory action initiated solely due to marital discord arising from the complainant’s inability to conceive. Family tensions related to this personal issue have been deliberately mischaracterize as “dowry harassment” to criminalize the applicant and his family members. He also submits that other co-accused were granted bail by the learned Court below. He further submits that vide order dated 05.05.2025, parties are directed to remain present before the Mediation Center on 13.05.2025 for their compromise and also directed the applicant to deposit Rs. 50,000/- with the Mediation Center of the High Court within 10 days but due to financial crises applicant failed to deposit the said amount and also has not appeared before the Mediation Center of this Court and as a result of this Mediation failed. He also submits that investigation and trial are likely to take time, therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the Objector opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 3 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the objector has also submitted that the applicant- husband has visited the parental house of the complainant-wife on 05.05.2025, the complainant- wife insisted him to take her back to his house, but the applicant refused and some quarrel took place between them. It is also submitted that in the said quarrel the applicant has also assaulted the complainant, due to which, she suffered some simple injuries. As such, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, gravity of offence, also considering the fact that the applicant is the husband of the complainant and had visited her parental house on 05.05.2025, whereby firstly the applicant refused to take her back to his house and, also in a quarrel took place between them, the applicant had assaulted the complainant, due to which, she suffered injuries and, for which, medical examination for the complainant was also conducted and further considering the fact that when this Court referred the case of the applicant and the complainant to the Mediation Centre for amicably resolving their dispute, the applicant neither appeared before the Mediation Centre nor deposited the amount so directed to deposit therein by this Court, therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 4 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant– Gajanand Khoote filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 involved in Crime No.0142/2025 registered at Police Station – Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections – 85, 115(2), 296, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali