Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21500 (CHH)

PARVATI GUPTA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5224/2026 · 2026-06-16

Shri Radhakishan Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:24361 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5224 of 2026 Parvati Gupta W/o Lt. Manoj Gupta Aged About 45 Years R/o Bardar, Present Address- Adhaura Police Station Balrampur District- Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Balrampur District- Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Sachin Nidhi and Shri Anjay Mishra, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order Sheet 17/06/2026 1. Heard on admission. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 105/2025 registered at Police Station – Balrampur, Dist. Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 103 (1) of B.N.S. 2023. 3. As per the prosecution’s case, on 30.07.2025, at about 3:25 am, the present applicant is alleged to have committed murder of her husband - Manoj Gupta by electrocution. Based on this, the offence under the aforesaid section has been registered against her. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence. He further submits that the applicant is the wife of deceased Manoj Gupta and eight witnesses, out 2 of twenty witnesses, have been examined so far. He also submits that none of the witnesses examined by the prosecution has not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since more than 10 months and that trial is going on and it may take some time to conclude. On these premises, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant/accused and the deceased/husband were residing in the same house where the deceased was found dead and against the applicant, named F.I.R. has been registered and some prosecution witnesses remain to be examined, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any leniency and the bail application is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of the offence and taking into account that the trial is going on, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is rejected at the admission stage. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani