1 / 3 2025:CGHC:44948 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6602 of 2025 • Amaso Tirkey W/o Late Jaiprakash Tirkey Aged About 40 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As S/o Late Jaiprakash Tirkey, In The Copy Of Bail Order Dated 23-06-2025 In Sessions Trial Case No. 54/2025) R/o Paloti Nagar, Kuturuwa, Thana Lemru, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station - Lemru, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anand Kumar Kujur, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 03/09/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 12/2025 registered at Police Station – Lemru, District Korba (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103(1) of B.N.S. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that accused reported a morgue intimation to the concerned police station stating that deceased (husband) used to suspect upon her character and on the date of incident when applicant was going towards agricultural field, she was followed by her deceased husband. On the way deceased tried to strangulate her and in order to save herself from such PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 act she pushed away him and thrashed his head on the stone lying nearby due to which deceased suffered grievous head injuries and succumbed to injuries. Based on the morgue intimation, enquiry was conducted and F.I.R. was registered. Applicant was arrested on 07.04.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has not voluntarily assaulted deceased but in the self defense and heat of passion she had pushed away her husband and smashed his head on the stone lying there. There was no intention of causing murder of deceased in any manner. In fact, act of applicant was in self defense and therefore, provision under Section 100 of BNS would not be attracted. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that looking to the gravity of offence, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. She further submits that there is memorandum statement of applicant as also nature of injuries and seizure, it is appearing that applicant has assaulted deceased with an intention to cause his death. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, as also considering that applicant being a lady is in jail since 07.04.2025, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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. 3 / 3 (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) 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 the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE