MCRCA/1451/2026 of INJLINA BHAGAT Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 10 September 2026

1. Applicant has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory bail as she is apprehending her arrest in ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG

connection with Crime No. 185 of 2026 registered at Police Station- Jhilmili, District- Sarguja (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Shail Kumari has lodged a report in the concerned Police Station stating that she is third wife of late Radheshyam Dubey and co- accused Virendra Dubey is her step son. She has initiated the proceedings for partition of the holdings, however, in the mean time co-accused Virendra Dubey has got prepared the forged document i.e. the death certificate and thereafter got his name mutated in revenue records of the land which was earlier recorded in her name. Virendra Dubey has subsequently sold the said land to other person. Based on the complaint made by Shail Kumari, FIR was registered and during investigation applicant (Patwari) was also implicated as an accused.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned crime, she has not committed any offence. He further submits that applicant is working as Patwari and based on the death certificate she has initiated the proceedings. She was not aware with regard to the death certificate produced before her to be forged. Applicant is a lady and is a Government servant, therefore, there is no likelihood of her absconding and would corporate in the investigation. He lastly submits that if anticipatory bail is not extended to her, she will suffer adversely, hence she may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He further submits that as per the allegation made against the applicant along with other co-accused persons have initially mutated the name in the revenue records and thereafter, had sold the property earlier recorded in the name of complainant. There are prima facie involvement of the applicant in the said crime.

5. Upon putting query to the learned counsel for the State with regard to the preparation of forged document i.e. the death certificate of the applicant, he submits that allegation with regard to the preparation of forged death certificate is against the co- accused Virendra Dubey and not against the present applicant.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations and further considering that applicant is a lady and is a Government Servant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the present application.

8. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Officer arresting her on executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting officer. Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :- “(i) that the applicant shall remain available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) 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 facts to the Court or to any police officer; Certified copy as per rules. Sd/--/-/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza