1 CGHC010230882026 2026:CGHC:32423 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 949 of 2026 Ayush Narayan Sharma S/o Vyas Narayan Sharma Aged About 22 Years R/o Behind Tiwari Building Kedarpur, Ambikapur Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer (S.H.O.) Police Station - Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar) (As Per Correct Details District – Ambikapur, Surguja (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Objector : Ms. Swati Rani Saraf, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2026 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who are apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 266/2026 registered at Police Station – Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), District – Ambikapur, Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 296, 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant/victim Shivanjali Dubey, aged about 21 years, lodged a written complaint before Police Station Gandhinagar, District Ambikapur alleging that she came in contact with the present applicant Ayush Narayan Sharma through Instagram in October, 2024 and thereafter developed a love RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 relationship with him. It is alleged that the applicant promised to marry her and on such promise established physical relations with her, as a result of which she became pregnant. The marriage between the victim and the applicant was solemnized on 05.12.2025 at a Shiva Temple, Ambikapur, The prosecution further alleges that after the marriage, the applicant's parents namely Smt. Surekha Sharma and Vyas Narayan Sharma refused to permit the victim to enter their house and demanded dowry, stating that she had not brought any articles or money from her parental home. It is also alleged that the applicant subjected the victim to cruelty, abuse and physical assault. The prosecution further alleges that thereafter the applicant and the victim started residing separately in a rented accommodation, however, the applicant continued to assault and harass her and frequently remained away from the matrimonial residence. It is also alleged that on 30.04.2026 the applicant abused, threatened and assaulted the victim and subsequently denied having any marital relationship with her. On these allegations, the complainant has sought registration of offence against the applicant and his family members under the provisions of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to cruelty, voluntarily causing miscarriage and other allied offences. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in compliance of the interim order dated 10.07.2026, the applicant and the complainant appeared before the Mediation Centre and though the mediation between the parties have failed, but thereafter, both the parties have solved their dispute outside the Court and they have already started living together again. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Objector also could not dispute the fact that though the mediation between the parties have been failed, but they have settled their dispute outside the Court and they are living together. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and the fact that in compliance of the interim order dated 10.07.2026, the applicant and the complainant appeared before the Mediation Centre and though the mediation between the parties have failed, but thereafter, both the parties have solved their dispute outside the Court and they have already started living together again, and the applicants has already been granted ad-interim bail vide interim order dated 10.07.2026 and the same is absolute, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Ayush Narayan Sharma, on executing a personal bond with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- 4 (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar