1 2026:CGHC:21164 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4131 of 2026 Kameshwar Singh S/o Lochan Singh Aged About 25 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Saraswatipur, Police Out Post Salka (Umeshwarpur), Police Station Premnagar, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Out Post Salka (Umeshwarpur), Police Station Premnagar, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/05/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 44/2025 registered at Police Station Premnagar, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant and the deceased, namely Savita, was solemnized in the year 2023. The applicant kept her well for about 7–8 months, thereafter, due to KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 family disputes, he allegedly started harassing his wife by quarreling with her, fighting and assaulting her. Owing to such conduct, the deceased informed her parents and relatives that the applicant used to beat her and ask her to consume something. Due to the aforesaid acts, the deceased allegedly committed suicide by consuming insecticide on 06.01.2025 at about 9:00 PM at her house. Hence, the FIR was lodged against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are false and fabricated and that he has neither committed nor participated in any act constituting the alleged offences. It is further submitted that the material collected by the prosecution is not prima facie sufÏcient to establish the involvement of the applicant. He further submits that the deceased consumed poison on 06.01.2025 and was hospitalized, where she succumbed during treatment on 15.01.2025, thereafter, merg intimation was lodged on 17.01.2025. It is further submitted that neither the inquest report nor the postmortem report reveals any external injury on the body of the deceased and, as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was cardio-respiratory failure due to poisoning, while the FSL report is still awaited. It is further submitted that, as per the statements of the parents and relatives of the deceased, there were only petty family disputes between the couple and the allegation against the applicant is that he used to quarrel with and beat the deceased and allegedly told her to consume something and die, which, by itself, does not constitute abetment within the meaning of Section 108 of the BNS, 2023, as 3 there was no direct or proximate act on the part of the applicant compelling the deceased to commit suicide. It is also submitted that no prior complaint regarding harassment or assault was ever made by the deceased before any authority. It is further submitted that charge has already been filed against the applicant, however, out of 16 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date due to non-appearance of witnesses despite issuance of notices, and therefore, the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is in custody since 08.04.2025 and no offence is made out against him; hence, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that after the marriage, the deceased was initially kept well by the applicant, however, after about 7–8 months, he started harassing her by quarreling, fighting, and assaulting her over petty family disputes. It is further submitted that the deceased had informed her parents and relatives that the applicant used to beat her and ask her to consume something and die. Due to continuous harassment and cruelty allegedly caused by the applicant, the deceased committed suicide by consuming insecticide on 06.01.2025 and subsequently died during treatment on 15.01.2025. She further submits that the statements of the parents and relatives of the deceased clearly support the prosecution case and considering the serious nature of allegations and gravity of offence, the present applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail at this stage. Hence, prayer is made for 4 dismissal of the bail application. 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, particularly the fact that the investigation has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further considering that the allegations against the present applicant, who is the husband of the deceased, are primarily based upon the statements of the parents and relatives of the deceased, it appears that there is neither any suicide note nor any eyewitness or dying declaration available on record. Although the allegation against the applicant is that after 7–8 months of marriage, he used to harass the deceased by quarreling with her, assaulting her and telling her to consume something and die, on account of which the deceased allegedly committed suicide by consuming insecticide, this Court also takes note of the fact that no prior complaint regarding such harassment was ever lodged before any authority. This Court further takes into consideration that the applicant is in judicial custody since 08.04.2025, charge has already been framed and out of 16 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date, therefore, conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant -Kameshwar Singh, involved in Crime No. 5 44/2025 registered at Police Station Premnagar, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) 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 Bhartiya 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 6 Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate 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 him in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal