Anticipatory bail granted to elderly woman with no criminal antecedents in communal riot case.

The applicant filed her first application for anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 339/2019, registered at Police Station Raghogarh for various IPC offenses, including Sections 147, 148, 149 (unlawful assembly), 395 (dacoity), and 452 (house-trespass)

The prosecution alleged that on September 8, 2019, the applicant’s husband, sons, and a mob of 40 persons armed with weapons assaulted a family and committed theft during a communal riot

While primary accused were arrested in 2019, the applicant claimed she fled the area due to the riots and only discovered her implication on February 7, 2026

She argued she was falsely implicated by association as the wife of the main accused, had no criminal antecedents, and was a victim of the same riots

Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS despite the gravity of the charges (including dacoity) and the time elapsed since the 2019 incident

The court exercised its discretion under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the successor to Section 438 of the CrPC, regarding the grant of anticipatory bail

The court adhered to the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly when an applicant lacks criminal antecedents, has a permanent residence, and demonstrates a willingness to cooperate with the investigation

The Court considered the "overall facts and circumstances" without commenting on the specific merits of the evidence

It weighed the applicant's status as a "veil-clad elderly woman" with no prior criminal record against the prosecution's allegations

The court noted the defense's argument that the applicant was not specifically named in the FIR for a distinct act but was identified merely through her relationship to her husband

Furthermore, the court found that the applicant’s permanent residency in Bhopal and Raghogarh minimized the risk of her absconding, and her commitment to cooperate with the investigation satisfied the judicial requirements for pre-arrest protection

It directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one solvent surety

The holding is subject to six conditions, including mandatory cooperation with the investigation, non-tampering of evidence, regular appearance during trial, and a prohibition on leaving India without prior judicial permission