1 CGHC010179222026 2026:CGHC:39922 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4220 of 2026 Smt. Sonamani W/o Shri Ashok Aged About 23 Years Caste Harijan, Profession Private Job, R/o Near Old Water Tank, Ghutra Para, P.S. And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sumit Sing, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 11.09.2026 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. 02/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the deceased, namely Smt. Durga Hari, aged about 44 years, resident of Ghutarapara, Ambikapur, was brought to Holy Cross Mission Hospital, Ambikapur, on 30.12.2025 in a dead condition. On the basis of the information received from the hospital, a ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.09.11 18:35:16 +0530 2 Merg Intimation under Section 194 of the BNSS was registered at Police Station Ambikapur. During the course of merg enquiry, the post-mortem examination of the deceased was conducted, wherein the doctor opined that the injuries sustained by the deceased were sufficient to cause her death. During the enquiry, the police recorded the statements of independent witnesses, namely Smt. Saraswati Rao and her granddaughter Divya Agariya. As per their statements, on 29.12.2025 at about 08:00 p.m., the deceased had visited the house of Saraswati Rao and was unable to walk properly. She allegedly stated that her husband, Dhannu Ram, had assaulted her on the head near her ear, resulting in a nail penetrating her head and causing bleeding. It is further alleged that while the deceased was leaving, her daughter Sonamoni stated that she and her father Dhannu Ram would beat the deceased and teach her a lesson. It is the further case of the prosecution that, on the basis of the post-mortem report, statements of the witnesses and the spot inspection, it was found that the deceased had sustained serious injuries due to assault allegedly committed by her husband Dhannu Ram and daughter Sonamoni with a stick, fists and hands. Thereafter, on account of deterioration of her condition due to the injuries, the deceased was taken to Holy Cross Mission Hospital on 30.12.2025, where she died during the course of treatment. Consequently, the prosecution alleges that the accused persons, namely Dhannu Ram and Sonamoni, in furtherance of their acts, assaulted the deceased and caused the injuries which ultimately resulted in her death. Accordingly, the aforesaid offences were registered against the applicant and other co-accused person. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the offence in question. He further submits that the entire prosecution case is based on 3 conjectures and assumptions, without any reliable or corroborative evidence. He submits that the deceased was in the habit of consuming alcohol excessively and, on the date of the incident, had allegedly consumed alcohol and was found in an unconscious condition, thereby creating a strong possibility that the death may have occurred due to circumstances unrelated to any intentional act on the part of the applicant. He also submits that, even as per the prosecution case, the alleged incident arose out of a sudden quarrel and there was no premeditation. The alleged occurrence took place in the heat of the moment and, therefore, the ingredients of an offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the BNS are not prima facie attracted. He submits that there was no intention on the part of the applicant to cause the death of the deceased, who was her own mother, and that the allegations, at the most, may constitute a lesser offence, which is a matter to be determined during the course of trial. He further submits that the present applicant is a lady and has been in custody since 02.01.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, on the aforesaid grounds, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court. He submits that the applicant assaulted the deceased with her hands and fists, whereas the co-accused, namely Dhannu Hari, husband of the deceased, assaulted her with a wooden log, which was subsequently seized from his possession. He further submits that the injuries sustained by the deceased were serious in nature and ultimately resulted in her death. The statements of the witnesses and the post- mortem report support the prosecution case. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the material available on record, he 4 prays for rejection of the bail application. 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 and gravity of the offence, and upon perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the name of the applicant has come to light on the basis of the memorandum statement, further, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the specific allegation against the present applicant is that she assaulted the deceased with her hands and fists, whereas the co-accused, namely Dhannu Hari, husband of the deceased, is alleged to have assaulted her with a wooden log, which was subsequently seized from his possession. Moreover, the fact that no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the present applicant. The applicant is a lady and has been in custody since 02.01.2026. Considering the period of custody undergone by the applicant and the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant - Smt. Sonamani, involved in Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on her 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 she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for 5 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 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 her in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Abhishek