1 2025:CGHC:3717 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 524 of 2025 1 - Manmohan Das S/o Late Ramudas Henwar Aged About 39 Years R/o Rampur Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, C.G. 2 - Smt. Savitri Henwar W/o Manmohan Das Aged About 36 Years R/o Rampur Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, C.G. ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, P.S. City Kotwali, Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01.2025 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. 462/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali District - Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence under Section 306, 34 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the brother of the applicant No.1 Vinayak Das committed suicide by consuming poison on KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 09.11.2022 stating that the harassment done by the applicants. After lapse of two years, the FIR No. 462/2024 was lodged by the wife of the deceased and when on 09.01.2025, the applicants came to attend a case in District Court Dhamtari at that time they were arrested on 09.01.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that two petitioners had come to Dhamtari to attend a case in District Court, Dhamtari on 09.01.2025 which was lodged by the mother of the applicant No. 1 against the wife of the deceased and subsequently in there they were arrested in FIR which was lodged the wife of the deceased on 28.11.2024, in case crime No. 462 of 2024. It is further stated that the incident has taken place in which the elder brother of the applicant had committed suicide in the year 2022 and the FIR was lodged after two years by the wife of the deceased for the said incident and they are in jail since 09.01.2025. He further submits that the applicant No. 2, who is a wife of applicant No. 1, having a child of 04 years minor daughter with his old mother of applicant No. 1 aged about 74 years who is suffering from various health issues related to health and there is no one to care them therefore, he has also filed I.A. No. 1/2025, which is an application for grant of ad-interim bail and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submit that the 3 handwriting reports of the handwriting experts were received on 14.10.2024. Based on the merg intimation, the incident was under investigation and statements were recorded. Subsequently, upon receiving the handwriting expert's report on 14.10.2024, the merg was converted into an FIR by the police. The suicide note leveled general allegations against the applicants, accusing them of harassing the deceased on various counts. Hence, they are 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 and circumstances of the case that two petitioners had come to Dhamtari to attend a case in District Court, Dhamtari on 09.01.2025 which was lodged by the mother of the applicant No. 1 against the wife of the deceased and subsequently in there they were arrested in FIR which was lodged by the wife of the deceased on 28.11.2024, in case crime No. 462 of 2024 and the incident has taken place in which the elder brother of the applicant had committed suicide in the year 2022 and the FIR was lodged after two years by the wife of the deceased for the said incident and they are in jail since 09.01.2025 further, the applicant No. 2, who is a wife of applicant No. 1, having a child of 04 years minor daughter with his old mother of applicant No. 1 aged about 74 years who is suffering from various health issues related to health and there is no one to care them therefore, he has also filed I.A. No. 1/2025, which is an application for grant of ad-interim bail moreover, based on the merg intimation, the incident was under 4 investigation and statements were recorded. Subsequently, upon receiving the handwriting expert's report on 14.10.2024, the merg was converted into an FIR by the police and the suicide note leveled general allegations against the applicants, accusing them of harassing the deceased on various counts and also considering the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has not yet been filed before the competent Court and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant –Manmohan Das and Smt. Savitri Henwar, involved in Crime No. 462/2024 registered at Police Station City Kotwali District - Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence under Section 306, 34 of IPC, be released on bail on furnishing their personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are deliberated or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce 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 Kunal