1 2026:CGHC:4744 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 928 of 2026 Nisha Kumbhkar W/o Umashankar Kumbhkar Aged About 26 Years R/o Bhawani Nagar Simga, Police Station Simga, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Description of applicant Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O4cer, Police Of Police Station Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Wrongly Mentioned As Police Station Bhatapara In The Order Sheet) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.01.2026 1. This is the 9rst bail application 9led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 596/2025 registered at Police Station- Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the o@ence punishable under Sections 109 and 61(2)(A) read with Section 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.10.2025 the Head Constable received a medico-legal intimation from the hospital informing the police that Umashankar Nishad had been assaulted by unknown persons with a sharp-edged weapon with an alleged intention to commit his murder. During the course of investigation, the brother of the injured, namely Sunil Kumar Kumbhkar, stated that he had received a call from the wife of the injured, i.e., the present applicant, informing him that one Anuj Sahu, who was well acquainted with her, was present at the New Bus Stand and required Rs.200/-, whereupon the said information was conveyed to the injured and he proceeded to the New Bus Stand, where he was assaulted by a co-accused with a sharp-edged weapon. It is further alleged that during investigation the memorandum statement of the applicant was recorded, wherein she stated that her marriage with the injured was solemnized about nine months prior as per caste customs and that she had been in contact with Anuj Sahu for about two years, meeting him on several occasions, and that since her husband allegedly restricted her movements, she along with Anuj Sahu conspired to eliminate him. On the basis of the said allegations, it is alleged that on 25.10.2025 the applicant sent her husband to meet Anuj Sahu on the pretext of arranging Rs.200/-, pursuant to which the injured was assaulted by the co-accused. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent woman and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that she has not acted in the manner alleged by the 3 prosecution. It is contended that except for the memorandum statement attributed to the applicant, no independent or corroborative material has been collected by the prosecution to establish that the applicant hatched any conspiracy with the co- accused Anuj Sahu to eliminate the injured, and therefore the allegation of conspiracy is wholly unfounded. It is further submitted that soon after the marriage, matrimonial disputes arose between the applicant and the injured, on account of which the applicant has been falsely dragged into the present case at the instance of the injured and his brother. It is also submitted that although the MLC of the injured opines the injuries to be grievous, the medical report nowhere states that the injuries were su4cient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, and therefore the essential ingredients of Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita are not prima facie attracted. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26.10.2025, the charge-sheet has already been 9led, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been 9led in the present case. She further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, as she is the wife of the injured and is alleged to have actively conspired with the co-accused to eliminate her husband. It is contended that the memorandum statement of the applicant clearly discloses her prior relationship with the co-accused and the 4 motive arising out of matrimonial discord, and that it was on her information that the injured was lured to the New Bus Stand, where he was assaulted with a sharp-edged weapon. She further submits that the o@ence is grave, involving a planned attack with an intention to commit murder, and therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, and the material available on record, it appears that the implication of the applicant is primarily based on her memorandum statement and there is no independent or direct evidence to substantiate the allegation of conspiracy. The applicant is not alleged to have been present at the place of occurrence nor is there any allegation of her participation in the actual assault. The distinction between the role attributed to the co-accused, who is alleged to have caused injuries by a sharp-edged weapon, and the applicant, whose role is con9ned to an alleged inducement, is apparent on record. Further considering the fact that she has no criminal antecedent, the charge-sheet has been 9led in the present case and she is in jail since 26.10.2025. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the applicant – Nisha Kumbhkar, involved in Crime No. 596/2025 registered at Police Station- Simga, District Balodabazar- 5 Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the o@ence punishable under Sections 109 and 61(2)(A) read with Section 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 9le an undertaking to the e@ect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 9xed 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 9xed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without su4cient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date 9xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 6 before the trial court on the dates 9xed 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 su4cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. O4ce is directed to provide a certi9ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan