1 2026:CGHC:9554 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 301 of 2026 Puneet Chaturvedi S/o Jai Prakash Chaturvedi Aged About 37 Years R/o Mirshadpur, Badlapur Jaunpur Uttar Pradesh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer P.S. Dhourpur District- Sarguja (Ambikapur) (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Upadhyay with Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.02.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.57/2025 registered at Police Station – Dhourpur, Ambikapur District- Sarguja (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Section 108 of the BNS 2023. 2. According to the prosecution case, an FIR dated 13.12.2025 has been registered in Crime No. 0057/2025 under Section 108 of the Bharatiya VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.24 16:21:01 +0530 2 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against the present applicant, who is the son-in- law of the deceased. It is alleged that the applicant, owing to a prolonged matrimonial dispute between the parties, subjected the deceased and his family to harassment and unlawful conduct, which ultimately led to the commission of the alleged offence. The prosecution asserts that the complaint was lodged after the death of the deceased and that the applicant played an active role in the circumstances resulting in the incident. It is further alleged that despite earlier disputes and prior complaints between the parties, the applicant continued his alleged misconduct, and therefore the present FIR was registered upon receipt of information disclosing commission of a cognizable offence. On the basis of the said allegations and material collected during preliminary inquiry, the police have initiated investigation against the applicant under the aforesaid provision of law. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the impugned FIR dated 13.12.2025 registered in Crime No. 0057/2025 under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is manifestly false, malicious, and has been lodged with an oblique motive to harass and pressurize the applicant on account of a long-standing matrimonial dispute between the parties. The FIR has been instituted after an unexplained and inordinate delay of nearly two months, which casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the allegations and renders the prosecution story unreliable. The Investigating Agency has deliberately ignored and suppressed the suicide note of the deceased, Om Prakash Upadhyay, wherein he categorically stated that he was under no pressure, acted of his own free will, and that the applicant, being his 3 son-in-law, had been falsely implicated; moreover, the learned court below failed to reproduce the suicide note in its original form and instead referred to it in a distorted manner allegedly tampered with during investigation, thereby vitiating the proceedings. The essential ingredients of the alleged offence are not made out even prima facie, and it is pertinent that the High Court of Allahabad has already stayed criminal proceedings arising out of the same set of facts in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and continuation of the present proceedings would amount to multiplicity of litigation and abuse of process of law. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, where his movable and immovable properties are situated, and therefore there is no likelihood of absconding; he is also a single parent of a pre-term minor girl child wholly dependent upon him, and his arrest would cause irreparable harm to the welfare of the child. The applicant undertakes to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and materials available on record, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court find it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Puneet Chaturvedi, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav