[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Atibai Verma @ Ramkumari vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11451
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2225 of 2026
Atibai Verma @ Ramkumari W/o Late Gunu Ram Verma Aged About 52 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.
Digitally
signed by For Non-Applicant/State : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. General.
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.11
11:39:19
+0530
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
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
(Khamariya) received the inquest diary from the Investigating Officer,
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bemetara, for registering the First
Information Report regarding the death of Kavita Verma, W/o Surendra
Verma, R/o Belgaon, 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 Surendra Verma (co-accused), the husband of the deceased,
had brought the deceased with him despite knowing that she was a
minor and had abducted her. It is further alleged that he assaulted her to
such an extent that she committed suicide. It is also alleged against the
present applicant, Atibai, and another co-accused, Sitaram, that they
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
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 is the mother
of the accused, namely Surendra Verma, and has been falsely implicated
in the present case without any cogent evidence. The prosecution,
merely on vague allegations that she used to taunt the deceased, has
implicated the present applicant in the aforesaid offences. It is also
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. From the material collected by the prosecution, it is evident that this
is not a case in which the applicant abused or threatened the deceased
with her life. In fact, the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis
of the statements made by the father and mother of the deceased, who
have alleged that the applicant used to say to the deceased that she had
come after eloping from her house. It is pertinent to mention here that,
from the bare perusal of the FIR and the entire charge-sheet, the main
allegation is against the co-accused Surendra Verma, who was the
husband of the deceased. Therefore, in these circumstances, the present
applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is submitted that there is no
admissible evidence against the present applicant to connect her with the
alleged crime. 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. 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 - Atibai Verma @ Ramkumari, 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
she 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 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.
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
