1 CGHC010314102026 2026:CGHC:35981 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7460 of 2026 Pankaj Choudhary Son Of Shri Sakaldeep Choudhary, Aged About 50 Years Occupation - Advocate, Resident Of Darripara, Police Station - Manipur, Nagar And Tahsil - Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal along with Mr. Vishal Sahu, Advocates For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.08.2026 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 he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 487/2026, registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 108, 351(3) of the BNS and Section 4 of the Karja Adhiniyam. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 08.05.2026 at about 2:45 PM, Sandeep Agrawal, son of Rajendra Bansal, was admitted to Holy Cross Hospital, Ambikapur for treatment, where he died on the same day at about 4:04 PM. On 09.05.2026, Laxman Bahadur Soud, an employee of the said hospital, gave information regarding the death of Sandeep Agrawal, stating that the deceased had died on account of consumption of a poisonous substance. On the basis of the said information, Merg No. 44/2026 was registered under Section 194 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Ambikapur. During the course of the Merg enquiry, the Investigating Officer allegedly seized a suicidal note, recorded the statements of witnesses and also collected the bank account statement of the deceased. Thereafter, on the basis of the material collected during the Merg enquiry, Crime No. 487/2026 was registered against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Karja Adhiniyam. The present applicant was arrested on 16.07.2026 and is presently in judicial custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that there is no cogent material connecting him with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the applicant neither threatened nor 3 instigated the deceased and no complaint regarding any such conduct was ever made against him. Learned counsel further submits that no document relating to any loan or money-lending transaction has been seized and that the applicant’s name is neither mentioned in the alleged suicidal note nor is any specific act of threat or instigation attributed to him therein. It is also submitted that the alleged incident occurred on 08.05.2026, whereas the FIR was registered on 16.07.2026 after an unexplained delay of more than two months. According to learned counsel, mere existence of a financial transaction cannot constitute abetment of suicide and even if the prosecution case is accepted at its face value, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out. It is further submitted that the deceased was engaged in dry-fruit business and had suffered business losses, which may have led him to take the extreme step. Learned counsel also submits that the applicant has been in custody since 16.07.2026, his previous cases have ended in acquittal, and the present prosecution is also alleged to be the result of personal animosity of the concerned police officer. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that during the course of Merg enquiry, the suicidal note, statements of witnesses and bank account 4 statement of the deceased were collected, on the basis of which the present FIR has been registered against the applicant for the alleged offences. Learned State counsel further submits that the material collected during investigation prima facie indicates the involvement of the applicant and that the allegations relate to abetment of suicide arising out of the alleged financial dealings with the deceased. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail at this stage. A 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, the nature of allegations, the fact that the applicant is in custody since 16.07.2026, the alleged incident occurred on 08.05.2026 whereas the FIR was registered on 16.07.2026, and the fact that the alleged suicidal note does not specifically mention the name of the applicant or attribute any specific act of instigation to him, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Pankaj Choudhary involved in Crime No. 487/2026, registered at Police Station- Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 351(3) of the BNS and Section 4 of the Karja Adhiniyam, be 5 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 they 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 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, 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 fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. 6 If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are 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 them 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 Kunal