1 2025:CGHC:45005 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6995 of 2025 Manoj Sahu S/o Shri Tejram Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o H.No. L- 08, Rani Durgawati Ward, Gurutej Bahadur Nagar, Amlideh, Raipur (C.G) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rajendra Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Subha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.09.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 125/2025 registered at Police Station – Rajendra Nagar District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per prosecution story, a merg intimation was received by police station Rajendra Nagar about concerning the deceased, Kaveri Sahu, VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.03 18:45:31 +0530 2 wife of applicant (Manoj Sahu). A site inspection and inquest proceedings were conducted. It was revealed that the deceased, Kaveri Sahu, was subjected to persistent mental his harassment by her husband/applicant, due to extramarital affair spanning five years. On 18 October 2025, applicant abandoned the marital home without notifying anyone. Following his departure, Kaveri was further tormented by her mother-in-law (Rajkumari) and sister-in-law (Nitu Sahu). Overwhelmed by continuous abuse, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. Consequently, an FIR was lodged against him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and has absolutely no connection with the incident. It is submitted that instigation is a necessary ingredient under Section 108 read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023, which requires the prosecution to establish that the accused had the requisite mens rea and a clear intention to provoke or induce the deceased to commit suicide. Even if the prosecution story is taken at its face value, there is no evidence to suggest that the applicant incited, or encouraged the deceased to take such an extreme step, nor was it ever his intention that the deceased should commit suicide. On the contrary, the death of the deceased appears to be the result of his personal reasons, and the essential ingredients of Section 108 of BNS, 2023 are missing in the present case. Furthermore, this Hon’ble Court has already been pleased to grant bail to the co-accused in MCRC/6193/2025 and MCRCA/1009/2025, and the applicant, being on a similar footing, is also entitled to the same relief therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of the learned counsel for both parties, the fact that no suicide note was left behind by the deceased, and that there is no eyewitness to suggest that the present applicant was involved in the alleged crime, and further that the other co-accused, namely, Neetu Sahu, has already been granted anticipatory bail and Rajkumari Sahu has already been granted regular bail by this Court, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant – Manoj Sahu, involved in Crime No. 125/2025 registered at Police Station – Rajendra Nagar District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be 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 4 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 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 certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav