Anticipatory bail granted in matrimonial dispute where allegations appear omnibus and counter to divorce proceedings.

The applicant, Rajan Singh, filed an anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Mahila Thana, Durg.

The complainant (the applicant’s wife) alleged that the applicant maintained an illicit relationship with his sister-in-law and that his family pressured the complainant to take a loan for a house in the mother-in-law's name, resulting in matrimonial harassment.

The applicant contended that the dispute is purely domestic, the allegations are vague, and the FIR is a counter-blast to his previous divorce petition.

The State opposed the application.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under the provisions of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) given the nature of the matrimonial allegations.

The Court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the High Court's power to grant anticipatory bail.

The underlying charges involved Section 85 (Cruelty by husband or relatives) and Section 3(5) (Joint liability/Common intention) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The court considered the standard principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception in matters involving matrimonial disputes where prima facie evidence of criminal intent is contested.

The Court reviewed the case diary and evaluated the facts and circumstances surrounding the matrimonial dispute.

It noted the applicant’s argument that the FIR was an abuse of process filed as a counter-blast to divorce proceedings and that co-accused family members had already been granted bail by the Sessions Court.

Without commenting on the ultimate merits of the criminal liability or the veracity of the illicit relationship allegations, the Court determined that the nature of the dispute and the materials on record did not warrant custodial interrogation at this stage.

The Court emphasized that the applicant's cooperation with the trial and adherence to restrictive conditions would sufficiently protect the interests of the prosecution.

The holding directed that, in the event of arrest, the applicant be released upon executing a personal bond and one local surety, subject to conditions: (a) no inducement or threats to witnesses; (b) no prejudice to the trial; (c) appearance before the trial court on all dates; (d) submission of Aadhaar and photograph for verification; and (e) no involvement in similar future offences.