Radhadevi Sain Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Though this case has been listed for hearing on admission, but with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally as the case diary is available with the State Counsel.

¶17

2

¶18

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.66/2025, registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (CG) for the offence under Sections 74, 115(2), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶19

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.3.2025, the complainant party came to the house of the present applicant and raised a quarrel and then, marpeat occurred between the parties and in the above incident, the members of the complainant party as well as the accused party sustained injuries. The present applicant lodged a complaint before the Police Station on 11.3.2025 itself but no FIR was registered on such complaint. Ultimately, she approached the concerned Superintendent of Police and on his instructions, the FIR has been lodged on 11.4.2025 against the complainant party. However, with regard to the same incident, a counter report was also lodged by the complainant party against the present applicant and her two sons on 13.3.2025 and Crime No.66/2025 was registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (CG) for the offence under Sections 74, 115(2), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, in which, the applicant is apprehending her arrest.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the complainant party came to the house of the present applicant and raised quarrel on the ground of outraging the modesty of the victim and they also committed martpeat with the present applicant as well as her two sons, as result of which, they sustained injuries. The complainant party were the aggressors and the present applicant and her sons, in their

¶21

3

¶22

defence, resisted the complainant party. He submits that a counter report has been lodged by the present applicant vide Crime No.88/2025 registered at Police Station Saraipali, against the complainant party, in which, they have been released on anticipatory bail by the trial Court vide order dated 2.5.2025 passed in Bail Petition No. 142/2025. He submits that it is a case and counter case between the two parties. He lastly submits that the applicant is a lady aged about 51 years and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, she may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶23

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He submits that there is an allegation of marpeat against the present applicant also along with her two sons with the complainant party, therefore, she is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶24

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, particularly considering the nature of allegations and the material collected during investigation and further considering that on a report made by the present applicant, in a counter case, Crime No.88/2025 has been registered against the complainant party, in which, they have been granted anticipatory bail by the trial Court vide order dated 2.5.2025 passed in Bail Petition No.142/2025, and also considering that the present applicant is a lady aged about 51 years and she is having no criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant - Radhadevi Sain , on executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, she shall be released on bail on the following

¶26

4

¶27

conditions:-

¶28

(a) She 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.

¶29

(b) She shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

¶30

(c) She shall cooperate with the investigation of the case.

¶31

(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, before the arresting officer.

¶32

(e) She shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future.

¶33

Certified copy as per rules.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

¶36

Judge

¶37

Shyna

Radhadevi Sain v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhadevi Sain v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pardeshi Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Meena Kumari Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Vaishya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pallavi Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ayaj Ahmad Vs State of Chhattisgarh