1 CGHC010166232026 2026:CGHC:31248 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3973 of 2026 Shiva Gupta S/o Rajesh Gupta Aged About 18 Years R/o Modaha, Hameerpur, Uttar Pradesh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO, Police Station- Kotwali, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ujjawal Agrawal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.07.2026 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. 157/2026 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, Durg, District - Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12.03.2026, a merg intimation was registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Durg, on the basis of information furnished by Chandan Gupta, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 brother of the deceased Vishal Gupta, stating that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging himself in his room. Thereafter, on 19.03.2026, the complainant submitted a detailed application before the Superintendent of Police alleging that, after the marriage, the wife of the deceased had been continuously subjecting him to mental cruelty and harassment, threatening to implicate him in false cases, maintaining an alleged illicit relationship with one Sudhir Verma, and had ultimately left the matrimonial home. It was further alleged that during the course of inquiry, a video recorded by the deceased prior to his death was recovered and seized, wherein the deceased purportedly attributed his extreme step to the continuous harassment allegedly caused by his wife, her brother (the present applicant), her maternal uncle, and Sudhir Verma. On the basis of the said allegations and the material collected during investigation, FIR bearing Crime No. 157/2026 was registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Durg, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 108 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, against the present applicant and other co-accused persons, pursuant to which they came to be arrested. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that no specific role has been attributed to the applicant either in the FIR or in the material collected during the course of investigation so as to prima facie establish his involvement in the alleged offence of abetment of suicide. It is further contended that 3 the applicant had no direct role in the matrimonial life of the deceased, as he was residing separately at Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, for the purpose of his studies and had no involvement in the matrimonial disputes between the deceased and his wife. It is also submitted that the essential ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide are not prima facie made out against the applicant, as there is no material on record to indicate any proximate instigation, intentional aid, or direct overt act attributable to him which could have driven the deceased to take the extreme step. He further submits that the case of the present applicant stands on a similar footing to that of co-accused Tannu @ Mohini Gupta, the wife of the deceased, who has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 6293 of 2026 vide order dated 15.07.2026. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, he has no criminal antecedents and the applicant is a young student aged about 18 years, pursuing a Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A.) course at Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, and that his examinations are imminent, and he is in jail since 29.03.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused person has already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co- accused. 4 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, the fact that though the allegations are that the applicant allegedly in collusion with co-accused, subjected the deceased to continuous harassment and abetted him to commit suicide, but also considering the fact that there was no eye witness to the alleged incident and further one of the co-accused, namely, Tannu @ Mohini Gupta, the wife of the deceased, who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6293 of 2026 vide order dated 15.07.2026, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused person, further the charge-sheet has already been filed, he has no criminal antecedents and the applicant is a young student aged about 18 years, pursuing a Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A.) course at Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, and that his examinations are imminent, and he is in jail since 29.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Shiva Gupta, involved in Crime No. 157/2026 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, Durg, District - Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 5 personal bond with two local 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 6 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