1 2026:CGHC:1293 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 132 of 2026 Mamta Dadsena W/o Ashwani Dadsena Aged About 55 Years R/o Village- Angari, Tehsil And District Balod C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balod, District Balod C.G. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. S.C. Verma, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Aditya Agrawal. Advocate. For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No.527/2025, registered at Police Station- Balod, District-Balod (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 326(g)/436, 3(5)/34, 111, 61(2) of the BNS/IPC 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 02.12.2025, the complainant Devendra Sahu lodged a report stating that he is the District President of Hamraj Party and also works as a journalist. It KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 is stated that he owns a Brezza car bearing registration number CG-24-W- 7166, which he usually parks in a garage constructed adjacent to the boundary wall of his residential house. On 01.12.2025, at about 06:30 PM, as per his daily routine, he parked the said vehicle in the garage and thereafter went inside his house. It is further alleged that upon entering the house, the complainant's wife informed him that at around 06:00 PM, two unknown boys had come to the house and inquired about his whereabouts. Subsequently, at approximately 06:45 PM, the said two unknown persons again arrived in front of the complainant's house and called out to him. When the complainant came outside, the two unknown boys disclosed that they were residents of the Dundi area and that their third companion was standing at a distance of about Bfty feet with a motorcycle. The unknown boys allegedly addressed the complainant as the President of Hamraj Party and as a journalist. It is further stated that upon being questioned, the complainant informed them that he intended to raise his voice against the illegal sale of liquor in his area by getting the matter published in newspapers and by taking up the issue within the organization. The complainant allegedly advised them to submit a written complaint. Thereafter, the two unknown boys left the premises. At about 09:00 PM, while the complainant was watching television with his family, his wife Gayatri heard some rustling noise outside the house. On coming out, she noticed that the complainant's car parked in the garage was engulfed in Cames. The complainant immediately informed acquaintances and managed to extinguish the Bre. On the 3 basis of the report alleging that two unknown persons had set the car on Bre, a crime was registered and investigation commenced, during which the suspected accused were taken into custody and their memorandum statements were recorded. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated, as there is no direct or reliable evidence connecting her with the alleged o;ence and the case is based purely on suspicion. The incident was initially attributed to unknown persons and the applicant has been implicated only on the basis of memorandum statements of co-accused, without any recovery or incriminating material at her instance and without proof of motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is a lady and has no connection with the three co-accused. She is not named in the FIR, whereas the co-accused persons are alleged to have set the complainant’s vehicle on Bre. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 07.12.2025, and in the present case, the charge- sheet has not yet been Bled and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the only allegation against the present applicant is that her involvement in the o;ence has surfaced during investigation on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co-accused, recorded after they were taken into custody. There is no direct allegation of her presence at the spot or of her having personally committed the act of setting the complainant’s vehicle on Bre. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 4 diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that the incident was initially attributed to unknown persons and the present applicant is not named in the FIR. Her implication has surfaced only during the course of investigation on the basis of memorandum statements of co-accused, without any direct allegation regarding her presence at the spot or her active participation in the alleged act, and without any recovery or incriminating material at her instance. The applicant is a lady and has been in judicial custody since 07.12.2025. The charge-sheet has not yet been Bled and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the gender of the applicant and the nature of allegations, this Court is inclined to extend the beneBt of bail to the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Smt. Mamta Dadsena, involved in Crime No.527/2025, registered at Police Station- Balod, District-Balod (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 326(g)/436, 3(5)/34, 111, 61(2) of the BNS/IPC, be released on bail on his 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 Ble an undertaking to the e;ect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 5 Bxed 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 Bxed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without suEcient 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date Bxed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates Bxed 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 suEcient 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 6 accordance with law. 9. OEce is directed to provide a certiBed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal