1 CGHC010262912026 2026:CGHC:29640 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6247 of 2026 Arun Kosle S/o Raaju Kosle Aged About 21 Years R/o- Amraiya Para Outpost- Manikpur Police Station- Kotwali District- Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Outpost- Manikpur Police Station- Kotwali District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.07.2026 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. 397/2026 registered at Outpost- Manikpur Police Station- Kotwali District- Korba, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.11.2025, accused Raju Kosle informed Police Station Manikpur that his daughter-in-law, Madhu Suryavanshi, had committed suicide by hanging herself in RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 her matrimonial home. On the basis of the said information, a merg intimation was recorded and an inquiry was initiated. During the course of investigation, including the inquest proceedings and recording of statements of witnesses, it was revealed that the deceased was allegedly subjected to continuous harassment and mental cruelty by her husband Arun Kosle, father-in-law Raju Kosle and mother-in-law Chandrika Bai Kosle. It was alleged that the accused persons used to taunt the deceased on the ground that she had come to her matrimonial home without bringing any articles and had earlier left the house, and they also frequently humiliated her regarding household chores, particularly cooking. Owing to the alleged continuous harassment and mental torture, the deceased became distressed and ultimately committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial home. During investigation, prima facie material was found against the accused persons for the commission of offences punishable under Section 80(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is innocent of the allegations levelled against him. It is contended that there is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with the alleged offence and that the prosecution case is based entirely on assumptions and conjectures. She further submits that no suicide note was recovered from the deceased, there is no eyewitness to the incident, and no dying declaration of the deceased has been brought on record 3 implicating the applicant. It is argued that the chain of circumstances is incomplete and does not prima facie establish the ingredients of the offence alleged against the applicant. She submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and that theirs was a love marriage. The deceased was residing with the applicant and his family members and was allegedly of a temperamental disposition, often becoming upset over trivial issues. It is submitted that whenever she was asked to assist in household work, particularly cooking, she would object and frequently insist upon living separately from the joint family. However, the applicant, being a daily wage labourer with limited means, expressed his inability to maintain a separate household. According to the defence, the deceased was distressed due to such personal and domestic issues and, on the date of the incident, committed suicide on her own. It is further submitted that at the relevant time no family member was present in the house, as all were away for work. She also submits that the applicant is a young man aged about 21 years, has no criminal antecedents, belongs to a poor family, and is the sole earning member of his household. She also submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the Competent Court and he is in judicial custody since 08.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. It is further submitted that the co-accused, who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, have already been granted bail by the trial Court, vide order dated 21.05.2026, and therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4 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 filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that during the course of investigation, statements of the witnesses have been recorded which prima facie reveal that the deceased was subjected to continuous harassment and mental cruelty by the applicant and the other accused persons, on account of which she was driven to commit suicide. She further submits that the applicant, being the husband of the deceased, had a direct and active role in the incidents leading to the commission of the offence and sufficient material has been collected during investigation indicating his involvement. Considering the gravity of the offence and the role attributed to the applicant, it is prayed that the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the case diary and the material available on record, and the fact that the applicant is the husband of the deceased, while the co- accused persons, who have already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court, are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. The allegations against the applicant are primarily based on the statements of witnesses regarding alleged harassment and there is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with the commission of the offence. Further considering the fact that no suicide note has 5 been recovered from the deceased, there is no dying declaration implicating the applicant, and there is no eyewitness to the incident. The post-mortem report indicates that the cause of death was ante- mortem hanging and no other external injuries suggestive of physical assault have been noticed on the body of the deceased. The applicant is a young person, has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in jail since 08.05.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the overall facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant- Arun Kosle, involved in Crime No. 397/2026 registered at Outpost- Manikpur Police Station- Kotwali District- Korba, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 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 6 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. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan