Chhattisgarh High Court
Criminal Procedure and EvidenceCriminal Law

Anticipatory bail granted to alleged attesting witness after co-accused beneficiary received the same relief.

KOMAL SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: September 26, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Anticipatory bail granted to alleged attesting witness after co-accused beneficiary received the same relief.. KOMAL SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 1036/2025, registered for offences under Sections 120-B, 34, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

Source reference: para. 1–2

The FIR was registered following a Magistrate’s direction on an application under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Source reference: para. 1–2

The applicant’s case was that he was implicated because he attested a Will dated 16 July 2021, and that the Will’s beneficiary, co-accused Aman Tiwari, had already received anticipatory bail.

Source reference: para. 3

The State and objector opposed relief; the objector also referred to the dismissal of an earlier quashing petition and alleged non-cooperation with the investigation.

Source reference: paras. 4, 6

The State reported no criminal antecedents in the case diary.

Source reference: para. 5
02

Issues

Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 1036/2025, having regard to the allegations and the circumstances of the case

Source reference: paras. 8–9

Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co-accused Aman Tiwari, together with the applicant’s asserted role as an attesting witness to the Will, supported granting the applicant similar relief

Source reference: paras. 3, 8
03

Law Applied

Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides the procedural basis for an application seeking anticipatory bail.

Source reference: para. 1

The offences alleged were under Sections 120-B, 34, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

Source reference: para. 1

The Court identified no precedent or detailed legal test; it considered the case-specific circumstances, including the nature of the allegations and the grant of bail to a co-accused, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

Source reference: para. 8
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the allegations, the parties’ submissions, the absence of any criminal antecedents recorded in the case diary, and the fact that a co-accused had been granted anticipatory bail.

Source reference: paras. 3–8

On that overall assessment, and without commenting on the merits, it found the applicant’s case suitable for anticipatory bail.

Source reference: para. 8

The relief was conditioned on the applicant making himself available for interrogation, not influencing witnesses, avoiding conduct prejudicial to a fair trial, appearing before the trial court as directed, and cooperating with the investigation.

Source reference: para. 9
05

Holding

The Court allowed the application.

It directed that, in the event of arrest in Crime No. 1036/2025, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety for the like amount, subject to the stated conditions.

Source reference: para. 9
06

Acts & Sections Cited

7 provisions across 3 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231

Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731

Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

KOMAL SAHUvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · September 26, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment