1 2026:CGHC:2006 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1961 of 2025 Mukesh Kumar Sahu S/o R C Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Village- Chikhli Tahsil And District- Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Deori, District- Balod C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. For Objector : Ms. Pooja Loniya, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.01.2026 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. 182/2025 registered at Police Station – Deori District - Balod (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 85, 88, 89 of the BNS 2023. 2. According to the prosecution's case, the complainant is B.S.C. Graduate and complainant and applicant got married on 25.02.2025. During initial days at matrimonial house complainant has not faced VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.14 11:39:33 +0530 2 any problem, but after 15 days applicant on small issues started harassing her mentally and physically. On the night of 30.09.2025 during pregnancy she asked the applicant to serve food to her mother-in-law thereafter in return, the applicant started beating her and after that the complainant informed at her parental house. That, thereafter, on same day (30.09.2025) present applicant made phone call to complainant sister and and asked them to take complainant along with them. After that, on 02.10.2025 the complainant parents, her sisters and brother in law came down to her matrimonial house at Village Chikhli (Rajnandgaon) and some dispute taken place due to which the husband of complainant/ t/ given given life threatening warning and after that complainant came to her parental house. After that, on 03.10.2025 she got miscarriage and then on 25.11.2025 First Information Report was lodged against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged against him. He has always been a cooperative and supportive husband and, with the consent of the complainant, has been assisting her in pursuing her M.Sc. studies and arranging online coaching for competitive examinations. In June – July 2025, when the complainant became pregnant, and thereafter during July–August 2025, at her own request, the applicant left her at her parental home to enable her to prepare for her examinations. On 21.09.2025, the applicant accompanied his wife to Bhilai for a competitive examination, after which they proceeded to Rajnandgaon. On 30.09.2025, a trivial domestic issue escalated when 3 the complainant started shouting at the applicant and his mother and thereafter called her brother-in-law to take her away, stating that she did not wish to live in her matrimonial home. Subsequently, on 02.10.2025 (Dussehra), the complainant’s elder sister and brother-in- law visited the applicant’s house, created an unpleasant situation, threatened the applicant by claiming influence with a Town Inspector, and took the complainant with them despite being informed about her pregnancy and the applicant’s concern for her well-being. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and there is no cogent evidence against him; he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The matter was earlier referred to mediation by this Hon’ble Court on 15.12.2025 and mediation took place on 12.01.2026, pursuant to which an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has already been paid to the complainant; however, despite the appearance of both parties, the mediation ultimately failed. No offence is made out against the applicant, and being a reputed member of the locality, any coercive action would cause irreparable damage to his reputation and career; therefore, he most respectfully prays for the grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the present applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, and further the fact that this matter was previously listed before this Court on 15.12.2025, and was referred for mediation, which took place on 12.01.2026. 4 Although both parties appeared, the mediation ultimately failed, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Mukesh Kumar Sahu, on executing a personal bond and one 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