1 CGHC010160752026 2026:CGHC:28674 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 679 of 2026 Sarvoday Yadav S/o Late Malram Yadav Aged About 46 Years R/o House No. 01-B/88, S. B. S. Colony S. E. C. L. Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Mahila Thana, Durg/District Magistrate, Durg, District – Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandirkaditya Pandey, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 09.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 17/2026, registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 85 and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant Smt. Poonam Yadav lodged a written complaint at Police Station concerned alleging inter-alia that her marriage was solemnized with the applicant Sarvoday Yadav on 10.05.2022 as per social customs and rituals. After about twenty days of marriage, her husband and both sisters-in-law allegedly acted in concert and started demanding dowry of Rs. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 5,00,000/- and a two-wheeler. It is further alleged that they used to taunt and humiliate her by making remarks about her complexion, calling her kali-kaluti and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty. It is further alleged that her husband and in-laws used to taunt her regarding the articles received in the marriage and that both sisters-in- law instigated the husband of the complainant by saying that considering his employment in SECL, adequate dowry was not given and that had he married elsewhere, he would have received more dowry. They also allegedly made remarks that her father is a retired railway employee and that they had expected substantial monetary benefits. The complainant has further alleged that during her pregnancy, both sisters-in-law drove her out of the matrimonial home, due to which she started residing at her parental home, where she gave birth to a daughter. It is further alleged that after the birth of the daughter, the harassment by the in-laws increased. On the basis of the aforesaid written report lodged by the complainant, and the crime was registered against the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the co-accused persons namely Radha Yadav and Gouri Yadav have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court in the bail application No.477/2026 vide order dated 09.04.2026, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 3 5. Learned counsel for the objector opposed the bail application and submits that twice the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre on the request of the counsel for the applicant and the complainant/wife has also appeared before the Mediation Centre, and as per the order- sheet dated 06.05.2026 the applicant was directed to serve the payment of Rs.50,000/- for the mediation process, but he has not deposited the money till date, and the applicant says that his mother was having cancer but there is no any documentary proof regarding the same. Therefore, this anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, it transpires that twice the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre on the request of the counsel for the applicant and the complainant/wife has also appeared before the Mediation Centre, and as per the order-sheet dated 06.05.2026 the applicant was directed to serve the payment of Rs.50,000/- for the mediation process, but he has not deposited the money till date, and the applicant says that his mother was having cancer but there is no any documentary proof regarding the same, thus, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant – Sarvoday Yadav, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 17/2026, registered at Police Station – 4 Mahila Thana, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 85 and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. 9. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 10. The Superintendent of Police, District – Durg (C.G.), is directed to communicate this order to the Investigating Officer of the case. 11. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police, District – Durg (C.G.), for necessary information and compliance, forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar