1 CGHC010309732026 2026:CGHC:37164 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1368 of 2026 Arti Yadav D/o Govardhan Yadav Aged About 18 Years Occupation-Student, R/o Kuniya Mainpath P. S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpath District - Sarguja (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Kamleshwarpur, District - Sarguja (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 46/2026, registered at Police Station : Kamleshwarpur, District - Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2) & 3(5) VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.19 17:43:41 +0530 2 of the BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, the applicant is the sister-in-law of the deceased and her brother, Anuj Yadav, was married to the deceased on 10.05.2023. The deceased’s maternal home was situated about 50 meters from the house of the applicant, and the families were close neighbours having frequent family visits and cordial relations. On 11.07.2026, while the applicant and her parents had gone to their agricultural field for sowing paddy and her brother Anuj Yadav was present at his rented shop situated at some distance from the house, the deceased allegedly attempted to commit suicide by hanging herself. She was immediately brought down from the noose and taken to the hospital by the family members, but she succumbed to her injuries on the way. Thereafter, owing to the unnatural death of the deceased, grief prevailed in both families. However, three days after the incident, the father of the deceased lodged a written complaint alleging that the deceased had been subjected to harassment in connection with dowry and implicating the applicant and other family members. On the basis of the said complaint, the First Information Report was registered against the applicant and other accused persons. 3. It is respectfully submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on account of being a family member of the deceased’s husband, and the allegations made in the FIR are baseless and fabricated. The applicant had attained the age of majority only six days prior to the alleged incident and is a dependent student residing with her parents, having no financial 3 independence, position of authority, occasion, motive, or reason to demand dowry from the deceased. The applicant’s maternal home is situated adjacent to the house of the deceased, and both families belong to the same community and had cordial relations; however, during the entire subsistence of the marriage, no complaint, social meeting, Panchayat, or dispute was ever raised regarding any alleged demand for dowry or harassment. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of three days from the date of the incident, after due deliberation and consultation, despite there being no immediate allegation of dowry demand or harassment, and the applicant was implicated without any specific overt act attributed to her. There is also no material showing any recovery or seizure from the possession of the applicant or any circumstance necessitating her custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal antecedents, is a young student, and is a law-abiding citizen; therefore, her arrest would cause serious prejudice to her future prospects. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant may kindly be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail in the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector opposed the anticipatory bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both parties, the nature 4 of the dispute, and the material available on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Arti Yadav, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) she 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) she shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he 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 his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) she shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE vaibhav