1 2025:CGHC:7155 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 170 of 2025 1 - Preeti Verma W/o Late Krushna Verma Aged About 29 Years R/o Bajarpara, Near Matachoura, Seepat, Ps Seepat, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - the state of chhattisgarh through SHO, PS Seepat, district Bilaspur (c.g.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Praveen Soni, Advocate through VC For Respondent/State : Shri Karan Kumar Bahrani, Pl (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 07.02.2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as she is in custody in connection with Crime No. 237/2024 registered at police station Seepat, District Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 294,323,506 and 302 IPC. SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.02.08 12:20:27 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that report was lodged by the complainant to the effect that on 5.5.2024, at about 7.00 am. on account of some quarrel over some household work, his daughter-in-law abused and beat her mother-in-law and she sustained grievous injuries. She was admited to CIMS Hospital on 7.5.2024 where during treatment she died on 22.05.2024, the applicant was arrested on 28.10.2024 for the offence under Sections 294,323,506 and 302 IPC. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the injury sustained by the deceased was caused by her husband/complainant. He further submits that the applicant is a widow, mother of three children and the incident occurred in a sudden quarrel between the complainant and the deceased, but when the applicant tried to intervene, she has been falsely implicated by the complainant. He submits that there was delay of about 5 months and 15 days in arresting the applicant and there is no explanation given by the prosecution. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.10.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, she is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon her and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposes the bail application. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. On due consideration of the rival submissions and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 28.10.2024 and looking to the fact that the applicant was arrested after a delay of 5 months and 15 days of the 3 incident after five days of the incident and the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, her bail application is allowed. 9. It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, she shall be released on bail on the following conditions: i) she shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. ii) she shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. iii) she shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial, (iv) she shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge