1 2026:CGHC:19964 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3870 of 2026 Purvendra Puri Goswami S/o Vijay Puri Goswami Aged About 34 Years R/o Karan Nagar, Near Ruchi Riya Sadi Centre, Changorabhata, Dindayal Upadhyaya Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Dindayal Upadhyaya Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 497/2025 registered at Police Station- Dindayal Upadhyaya Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 80, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 21.10.2025, the deceased, who was the wife of the present applicant, committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial home. It is alleged that prior to her death, she had uploaded a video on her mobile phone wherein she made allegations that the applicant, along with other co- accused persons, used to harass her in connection with demand of dowry. The marriage between the deceased and the applicant was solemnized on 16.01.2025. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested in connection with the said incident. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that on 21.10.2025, an argument had taken place between the deceased and the applicant on a trivial issue relating to a TV remote, and thereafter, in an unfortunate turn of events, the deceased committed suicide, leaving the applicant and other family members in shock. It is also submitted that from the date of marriage i.e. 16.01.2025 till the date of the incident i.e. 21.10.2025, no complaint or report was ever made by the deceased before any authority alleging harassment or demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the statements of the witnesses have been recorded under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and there is no seizure of any material or article which substantiates the allegations made by the family members of the deceased. It is also contended that the deceased had frequent disputes with the applicant regarding living with the in-laws and her behavior towards them was 3 not cordial since the marriage. It is submitted that the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court in M.Cr.C. No. 2820/2026 vide order dated 25.03.2026 and in M.Cr.C. No. 2328/2026 vide order dated 12.03.2026. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 24.10.2025, he has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He also submits that the marriage between the deceased and the present applicant was solemnized on 16.01.2025, and within a short span of time, i.e., on 21.10.2025, the deceased committed suicide in her matrimonial home under unnatural circumstances. It is further submitted that prior to her death, the deceased had recorded/uploaded a video on her mobile phone wherein she has specifically alleged that the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, used to harass her in connection with demand of dowry, which clearly indicates continuous cruelty and harassment meted out to her. It is contended that such material evidence, coupled with the surrounding circumstances, prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence. It is also submitted that considering the serious nature of allegations, particularly relating to dowry death within a short period of marriage, the presumption under the relevant provisions of law operates 4 against the applicant. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail, and the application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, and the material available on record, It is not in dispute that the marriage between the deceased and the present applicant was solemnized on 16.01.2025 and within a short span of time, i.e., on 21.10.2025, the deceased committed suicide in her matrimonial home under unnatural circumstances. The allegation of continuous harassment in connection with demand of dowry is prima facie supported by the video recorded by the deceased prior to her death, wherein specific allegations have been levelled against the present applicant along with other co-accused persons. Considering the proximity of time between the marriage and the death, and the nature of allegations, the statutory presumption operates against the applicant at this stage. Though it is true that the co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail, however, they stand on a different footing as they are the in-laws of the deceased, whereas the present applicant is the husband, against whom direct and specific allegations have been made. In such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 5 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Purvendra Puri Goswami, involved in Crime No. 497/2025 registered at Police Station- Dindayal Upadhyaya Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 80, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan