Raipur, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO, P.S. Kharora, Distt. Raipur, C.G
Case Details
1 GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.09.04 18:02:27 +0530 2025:CGHC:45076 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5570 of 2025 1 - Smt. Pooja Nirmalkar W/o Suraj Nirmalkar, Aged About 21 Years R/o - Village Muda, Ward No. 4, Porabhatha, Police Station - Kharora, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
Legal Reasoning
2 - Smt. Rajkumari Nirmalkar, W/o Samelal Nirmalkar, Aged About 41 Years R/o - Village Muda, Ward No. 4, Porabhatha, Police Station - Kharora, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO, P.S. Kharora, Distt. Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Advocate. For : Shri Soumya Rai, PL. Respondent/State Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/09/2025 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 2 bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.633/2024 registered at Police Station Kharora, Distt. Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 34 of IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15th March 2024, at around 9:00 pm, deceased Smt. Durgeshwari Nirmalkar, a 22-year-old woman was found hanging from the ceiling fan in her room. The deceased's husband, Yashwant Nirmalkar, reported the incident to the police at Police Station Kharora, District- Raipur. A suicide note was recovered from the scene, which implicated the husband's family members, stating that they were responsible for her death. The maternal side of the deceased alleged that the deceased was subjected to mental harassment and cruelty by her in-laws, including deceased's father-in- law Radhelal Nirmalkar, mother-in-law Rameshwari Nirmalkar, aunt-in- law Rajkumari Nirmalkar, sister-in-law Puja Nirmalkar, brother-in-law Suraj Nirmalkar, grandmother-in-law Sukhiya Nirmalkar, and husband's younger brother Pankaj Nirmalkar, over dowry demands. On the basis of the report, the police registered the offence against the applicants under section 304 (B) and 34 of IPC and they were arrested on 29.04.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Applicant No. 1, Smt. Puja Nirmalkar being the sister-in-law, and the Applicant No. 2, Smt. Rajkumari Nirmalkar, being the aunt-in-law of the deceased are distant relatives of the deceased and they are not involved in the demand of dowry or harassment and therefore they have no role in commission of alleged offence. He would submit that there is lack of Direct Nexus as the deceased's suicide letter, "Meri Kahani," does not 3 mention any demand for dowry or taunts related to dowry by the applicants/accused. The suicide letter only mentions minor domestic issues, such as the mother-in-law's preference for the elder sister-in- law and dissatisfaction with the deceased's work, but does not establish any connection between these issues and the alleged dowry death or suicide. He would submit that none of the prosecution witnesses, including the mother, father, sister, and brother of the deceased, have made any statements in the death intimation report regarding demands for dowry, harassment, or instigation to suicide by the applicants/accused and omission raises significant doubts about the involvement of the applicants/accused in the alleged offence. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicants are in jail since 29/04/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and he would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court. He would submit that deceased committed suicide by hanging and the suicide note has been recovered wherein general allegations have been levelled against the applicants. 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, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the fact that general allegations have been levelled against the applicants in the suicide note, period of detention of the applicants since 29/04/2025, charge sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that trial is 4 likely to take some time for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant No.1-Smt. Pooja Nirmalkar and applicant No.2 Smt. Rajkumari Nirmalkar, involved in Crime No.633/2024 registered at Police Station Kharora, Distt. Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 34 of IPC, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the 5 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri