[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Aman Nagvani vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:10296
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
signed by
GOURI MCRCA No. 328 of 2026
GOURI MUDALIAR
MUDALIAR Date:
2026.02.27
19:30:16
Aman Nagvani S/o Shri Dilip Nagvani Aged About 34 Years R/o Through
+0530
Pranay Shankar Pandya, 26/2, Vivekanand Marg, Nandan Kanan, In Front Of
Kachnar Club, Kachnar City, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur (M.P.) P.S. Vijay Nagar,
Dist- Jabalpur (M.P.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Mahila Police Station, Sector 06, Bhilai, Dist
Durg C.G.
... Respondent
For Applicant : Shri Saurabh Mahant, Advocate.
For : Ms. Monika Thakur, PL.
Respondent/State
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
27/02/2026
1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who
is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.07/2026 (crime
year wrongly mentioned in impugned order) registered at Police Station
- Mahila Thana, Sector 06, Bhilai, Dist Durg C.G.. for the offences
punishable under Sections 85, 3(4) of BNS & Section 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant, Smt. Payal
Badani, married the applicant, Aman Nagvani, on 09.02.2020. Soon
after marriage, the applicant and his mother allegedly harassed her for
insufficient dowry and pressured her to arrange funds for purchasing a
house. It is alleged that even after shifting to Bengaluru, and later
during postings in Kerala and Indore/Sanwer, the applicant continued
to demand money and forced her to bear household and rental
expenses. The complainant claims that between 2020 and 2025, she
transferred substantial amounts to the applicant and his family
members under pressure, alleging total transfers of about Rs.50 lakhs.
On her complaint, Crime No. 07/2026 was registered at Mahila Thana,
Sector 06, Bhilai, District Durg, under Section 85 and 3(4) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The applicant's anticipatory bail application was rejected by the 4th
Additional Sessions Judge on 24.01.2026. Hence this anticipatory bail
application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations are false,
fabricated, and filed as a counter-blast after the dissolution of marriage.
He would submit that the parties had mutually agreed to share
household and investment expenses, and all financial transactions
were voluntary and related to joint living expenses and a jointly booked
flat in Bengaluru, partly financed through the applicant's staff housing
loan. It is submitted that the applicant has cooperated with the
investigation, appeared pursuant to notices, and disclosed the divorce
decree dated 28.08.2025 passed by the competent Family Court. He
would submit that the co-accused (mother) has already been granted
bail on similar allegations, and the applicant seeks parity. He would
further submit that the complainant is a highly qualified Chartered
Accountant earning substantial income and the applicant is a Bank
Manager with no criminal antecedents. He would submit that the
applicant is a permanent resident of address shown in the cause title of
the bail application and undertakes to cooperate with the investigation,
therefore, he submits that the present applicant is entitled to be
released on anticipatory bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the non -
applicant/State, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials
available on record.
6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of
learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record,
considering the fact that after decree of divorce, FIR has been
registered under Section 498-A IPC and further considering the fact
that co-accused has been granted bail by the trial court, therefore I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant.
7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the
event of arrest of the applicant - Aman Nagvani, 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) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.
(c) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of
similar nature in future.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
gouri
