Facts
The applicant, Smt. Urvashi Shrivas, sought anticipatory bail following the registration of Crime No. 99/2026 at Police Station Takhatpur for alleged fraud
Source reference: para. 3-4The prosecution alleged that the applicant, in connivance with others, obtained government financial assistance of Rs. 4,00,000/- under a Social Security Scheme by filing a claim supported by forged documents
Source reference: para. 4Specifically, while she claimed her husband, Purshottam Shrivas, died of a snake bite, an inquiry conducted by the Tahsildar and police suggested discrepancies in death records (Merg Intimation) and raised suspicions regarding the actual cause of death
Source reference: para. 4The applicant sought parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail
Source reference: para. 5Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, despite allegations of financial fraud against the State
Source reference: para. 3, 6, 8Law Applied
Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 CrPC), regarding the grant of bail to persons apprehending arrest
Source reference: para. 3Section 420 (Cheating), 467 (Forgery of valuable security), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (Using as genuine a forged document), and 34 (Common intention)
Source reference: para. 3-4principle of parity in bail matters
Source reference: para. 5, 8Reasoning
Despite the State’s opposition on the grounds that the applicant had successfully defrauded the government of compensation, the Court noted that a co-accused, Mahendra Kumar Manhar, had already been granted anticipatory bail in MCRCA No. 378/2026 on 11.03.2026
Source reference: para. 5, 6, 8The Court observed that the incident of the husband's death was admitted (though the cause was disputed) and took into account the applicant's status as a local resident and a woman, concluding she was unlikely to abscond or tamper with evidence
Source reference: para. 5Consequently, the Court found the applicant eligible for parity and protection from custodial interrogation
Source reference: para. 8Holding
The High Court allowed the application (MCRCA) and granted anticipatory bail to the applicant
The Court directed that in the event of arrest, she be released upon executing a personal bond and one surety, subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses, regular appearance before the trial court, and a prohibition against committing similar offences in the future
Source reference: para. 9Any violation of these conditions would entitle the State to move for cancellation of bail
Source reference: para. 9-10Original Court PDF
SMT. URVASHI SHRIVASvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in