-1- 2025:CGHC:15633 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 399 of 2025 Deepak Yadav S/o Shri Siyaram Yadav Aged About 30 Years Occupation Cultivator Resident Of Village Raghupur, P.S. Dhourpur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Applicant (s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chandoura, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. J.K. Gupta with Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocates For State : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 03/04/2025 1. Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with Crime No.90 of 2023 registered at Police Station –Chandaura, Surajpur, District- Surajpur (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 of IPC. 2. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. His Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.04.07 13:07:37 +0530 -2- earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 17.01.2024. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that deceased Sarswati was married with applicant on 14.03.2023 and thereafter she went to her matrimonial house. About 1 ½ months prior to date of incident i.e. 12.07.2023, she came to her parent’s house and committed suicide by jumping into the well on 12.07.2023. Incident was reported to concerned police station and after morgue inquiry, applicant was arrested on 17.10.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any offence. Deceased-wife could not able to adjust in her matrimonial home and, therefore, she has taken extreme step of committing suicide as it is apparent from statement of brother of the deceased recorded before the trial Court. He also submits that the deceased committed suicide after about 1 ½ months from the date of leaving the matrimonial home. There is no direct allegation that the applicant, at any point of time, had made demand of dowry from the parents or brother of the deceased - wife, but the general and omnibus allegations have been levelled that deceased informed that applicant has made a demand of dowry of Rs.1.5 lakhs from her, which cannot be accepted. Applicant is in jail for almost 1 ½ years. There are as many as 27 enlisted witnesses out of which only 5 witnesses have been examined, trial may take some time, hence, applicant may be enlarged on bail. -3- 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that there is allegation against the applicant of making demand of dowry of Rs.1.5 lakhs which made the deceased to commit suicide, hence, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. However, he do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the applicant with respect to period of pre-trial detention, number of total enlisted witnesses and number of witnesses examined before the trial Court as of now. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed along with the bail application. 7. Taking into consideration the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, pre-trial detention of applicant and further considering that trial may take some time, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail on his furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:-. “(a) 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 -4- bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) 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. (c) 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. (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 him in accordance with law.” 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/--/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen