Chattisgarh High Court
Surendra Verma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11452
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2109 of 2026
Surendra Verma S/o Lt. Gunuram Verma Aged About 20 Years R/o Village-
Belgaon, P.S. And Tehsil- Thankhamariya, District- Bemetara (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Thankhamariya (Khamariya),
District- Bemetara (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Senior Advocate assisted
by Ms. Kanchan Kalwani, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer.
Digitally
signed by
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS
Date:
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
2026.03.11
11:39:20
+0530
Order on Board
10.03.2026
1.This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 150/2025 registered at Police Station - Thankhamariya (Khamariya), District Bemetara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 107, 108, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 84 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
2. The prosecution case, in brief is that Police Station Thankhamariya received the inquest diary from the Investigating Officer, Deputy 2 Superintendent of Police, Bemetara, for registering the First Information Report regarding the death of Kavita Verma, W/o Surendra Verma, on the basis of merg intimation bearing No. 19/2025 given by one Rajesh Kumar, Peon, C.H.C., Saja. On the basis of the said merg intimation, a First Information Report bearing No. 150/2025 was registered for the offences under Sections 137(2), 108 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., and after investigation, Section 107 of the B.N.S. and Section 84 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 were also added. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the present applicant is the husband of the deceased and, despite knowing that she was a minor, he abducted her and assaulted her to such an extent that she committed suicide. It is further alleged that the other co- accused persons, namely Sitaram and Atibai, who are the uncle and mother of the present applicant respectively, used to taunt the deceased by saying that she had come there after eloping, and due to such harassment the deceased committed suicide on 30.06.2025 by consuming a poisonous substance. After completion of the investigation, the police arrested the present applicant along with the other co-accused persons on 23.09.2025.
3. Ms. Singhai, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is no material available on record to show that, by any direct or indirect act of the present applicant, the deceased committed suicide. It is submitted that the present applicant and the deceased were in a love affair and both got married on 12.05.2025. They were having cordial relations. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the present applicant engaged in any act so as to constitute the alleged offence; therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is a well- settled principle of law that the presence of mens rea and the intention to 3 abet the act are essential ingredients to constitute an offence under Sections 107 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Therefore, mere allegations of harassment are not sufficient to constitute the offence of abetment of suicide. It is submitted that the prosecution has failed to establish that any active or direct act on the part of the present applicant led the deceased to take her own life. Hence, the present applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is pertinent to mention that, from the bare perusal of the First Information Report and the entire charge-sheet, it is revealed that the deceased married the present applicant after eloping with him as they were in a love affair. The father of the deceased was well aware of this fact. In these circumstances, the prosecution story does not appear to be reliable. As a matter of fact, the prosecution, merely on vague allegations that the present applicant took the deceased with him and assaulted her, has implicated the present applicant in the present case. It is important to mention that the deceased used to video call her parents even after marrying the present applicant. Therefore, it cannot be said that the present applicant had abducted her or instigated her to commit suicide. It is noteworthy that no complaint had been lodged by the family members of the deceased at the relevant time, which itself shows that, due to their love affair and belonging to the same caste, the deceased and the present applicant got married with the knowledge of the members of both families. Therefore, in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the present applicant instigated the deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that there is no suicide note was left behind by the deceased to suggest that the present applicant was involved in the alleged crime. It is argued that the applicant is in jail since 23.09.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
4
4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel for both parties, and the fact that no suicide note was left behind by the deceased to suggest the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged crime, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and that the applicant has been in jail since 23.09.2025, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Let the applicant - Surendra Verma, involved in Crime No. 150/2025 registered at Police Station - Thankhamariya (Khamariya), District Bemetara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 107, 108, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 84 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, be 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 he 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.5
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek