1 CGHC010235892026 2026:CGHC:38436 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 985 of 2026 Mohammad Shahbaj S/o Mobeen Ahmad Aged About 32 Years (Named As Mohammad In Fir, Wrongly Mentioned In Order Dated 26-02-2026 As Mohammad Shebhaz), R/o House No. A-9, Khn No. 31/9, Back Portion, Second Floor, Block-A, Gali No. 1, Hardev Nagar, Jharoda Majraa, North Delhi, Delhi 110084 (Address Mentioned In The Fir As 1- 15/447, Mehfooz Nagar, Bazardiha, Bhlupur, District Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh- 221109) ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Pondi- District- Manendragarh Chirmiri Bharatpur (Mcb)(C.G.) 2 - Airam Naiyer Alias Rafiya D/o Mahmood Naiyer Azam R/o Ward No. 5, New Mines, Pondi, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (Mcb) (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate For State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. For Objector : Mr. Vibhor Goverdhan, Advocate HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 31.08.2026 1. This second anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.08.31 16:34:45 +0530 2 the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 49/2025 registered at Police Station – Pondi, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of Muslim Women Protection of Right on Marriage Act, 2019. 2. First anticipatory bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 26.02.2026 passed in MCRCA No. 322 of 2026. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant i.e. Respondent No 2 has lodged an FIR against the present applicant alleging that, the applicant on 13.05.2025, the husband of the complainant i.e. applicant who lives in Dubai, called her through conference call, and that the applicant pronounced triple talaq, and thus has committed, cruelty and offence under Section 498-A, Section 34 of IPC as well as Section 4 of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights On Marriage Act) 2019. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the mediation has been successful 3 and that the applicant has deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, as directed by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2026. He further submits that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is also submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant deserves to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. They submit that, having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve the indulgence of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are serious in nature and that the applicant may influence the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence, if enlarged on anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the objector has also opposed the application on the ground that the grant of anticipatory bail at this stage may adversely affect the fair and proper investigation of the case. On these grounds, learned State 4 counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector submit that the anticipatory bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the material available on record, this Court finds that the mediation proceedings have been successfully concluded pursuant to the order dated 01.07.2026 passed by this Court, and the applicant has also deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with the Mediation Centre, as directed. Consequently, the interim order dated 01.07.2026 has attained finality. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court finds it appropriate to consider the prayer of the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Mohammad Shahbaj, on executing a personal bond and one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he 5 shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he 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) he 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) he shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saurabh