1 CGHC010263622026 2026:CGHC:29330 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6203 of 2026 Venu Gopal Sahu @ Venu Kumar Sahu S/o Panchuram Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Dhuma, Chowki Birejhar, P.S Kurud, Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O) P.S.- Rajim, Dist.- Gariyabandh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Jyoti Roy, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed 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. 120/2026 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Rajim, Dist.- Gariyabandh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 108, 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during the merg inquiry into the death of the deceased, Kanti Sahu, it was revealed from the statements of her parental and matrimonial relatives that she was subjected to continuous harassment and physical assault by her husband, Ram Bhagwan Sahu, and co-accused Venu Gopal Sahu over her refusal to claim a share in her parental property. It is alleged that on 06.03.2026, the accused persons, under the influence of alcohol, abused and assaulted the deceased, due to which she consumed pesticide and subsequently succumbed to the poisoning during treatment on 10.03.2026. On the basis of the merg inquiry, the present crime was registered against the accused persons for the alleged offences. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits that the applicant is merely a friend of the principal accused and that the allegations regarding prior quarrels or strained matrimonial relations do not, by themselves, establish his involvement in the alleged offence, further the deceased admittedly consumed pesticide, and whether such act was the result of any intentional instigation or abetment by the applicant is a matter to be determined during trial, as there 3 is no material disclosing direct instigation, intentional aid, or active participation on his part. She also submits that the prosecution case is founded primarily on the statements of the deceased's family members and close relatives, whose testimonies are yet to be tested by cross-examination. Therefore, such statements cannot, at this stage, be treated as conclusive against the applicant. She lastly submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, rendering further custodial interrogation unnecessary. The applicant has cooperated with the investigation, is a permanent resident with deep roots in society, is not likely to abscond, and all material exhibits have already been seized, leaving no possibility of further recovery from him. The applicant is in jail since 30.04.2026, and having no criminal antecedent, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant allegedly in furtherance of the common intention with the co-accused, subjected the deceased to abuse and physical assault, which allegedly drove her to consume pesticide, resulting in her death during treatment, the said fact is corroborated by the deposition of independent witnesses, who were present at the spot for settlement of some matrimonial dispute between the co- 4 accused/husband and the deceased, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 30.04.2026, the fact that though the applicant allegedly in furtherance of the common intention with the co-accused, subjected the deceased to abuse and physical assault, which allegedly drove her to consume pesticide, resulting in her death during treatment, but considering the fact that the principal allegations are directed against the co-accused, Ram Bhagwan Sahu, who is the husband of the deceased and also the main accused in the present case, hence the applicant is not the principal accused and his role is distinguishable from that of the husband of the deceased, also considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Venu Gopal Sahu @ Venu Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 120/2026 registered at Police Station Rajim, Dist.- Gariyabandh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 108, 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his 5 furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed 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 fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed 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 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 6 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil