1 2025:CGHC:36232 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5851 of 2025 • Akshay Kumar Pasi S/o Umesh Pasi Aged About 26 Years R/o Behind District Hospital, Bhatthapara, Ambikapur, P.S.- Manipur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Manipur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25/07/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.106/2025 registered at Police Station- Manipur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) of BNS. 2. As per prosecution story in brief is that on 19.03.2025, the applicant given an intimation before the Police Station, Manipur to the effect that his marriage was performed with the deceased Roshni Pasi on VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.07.28 18:25:08 +0530 2 02.12.2024 and after marriage, the applicant and deceased were living together. In the month of March, 2025 the applicant and deceased went to enjoy Holi festival in the parental house of deceased at Gadhwa, from where they returned on 18.03.2025 and they reached at Ambikapur on 19.03.2025 at early morning at about 5.30 AM. On 19.03.2025 at about 8.00 AM, the applicant told that he is going to his duty, but the deceased Roshni Pasi requested the applicant for not going to work and stay in the house because she was alone in the house, but the applicant went for his duty. Later on the applicant returned to his house and he found that the door of house is closed from inside. The applicant somehow opened the door and he found that Roshni Pasi is hanging dead through her scarf. The applicant has taken the deceased to District Hospital, Ambikapur, where she declared dead. On the basis of above intimation, the merg no. 10/2025 was registered and after merg enquiry, the offence under Section 80(2) of BNS has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and it has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is a husband of the deceased and deceased had returned from her parental home on the date of incident thereafter, she committed suicide and from the statement of the mother of the deceased goes to show that the applicant made a demand of a car from the parents of the deceased, but it is argued by learned counsel for the applicant is that no such complaint was ever made by the deceased before the incident with respect to the said demand. He also submits that the cause of death of deceased was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging and no other 3 antemortem injuries were found on the person of the deceased except antemortem hanging and there is no eye witness account in the present case, no dying declaration was recorded and no suicidal note was left behind by the victim. The applicant is in jail since 15.04.2025 the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant alongwith his family members are used to torture the victim on account of which she has committed suicide, therefore the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of offence, looking to the fact that the cause of death of deceased was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging and no other antemortem injuries were found on the person of the deceased except antemortem hanging and there is no eye witness account in the present case, no dying declaration was recorded and no suicidal note was left behind by the victim. The applicant is in jail since 15.04.2025 , further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court, hence, at this stage without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Akshay Kumar Pasi involved in Crime No.106/2025 registered at Police Station- Manipur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) of BNS., be 4 released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 him 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 BNSS. 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 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 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 5 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 send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaishali