New BNSS Provisions Remove Key Factors Like Gravity of Accusation and Criminal Antecedents in Anticipatory Bail Decisions: Chhattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh High Court delivered a significant ruling in the case of Smt. Parisha Trivedi & Anr. vs. State of Chhattisgarh (MCRCA No. 944 of 2024), granting anticipatory bail to the applicants under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The ruling showcases the broader framework for anticipatory bail under BNSS, which has replaced the earlier provision under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973.

The case stemmed from a family dispute involving Smt. Parisha Trivedi, her husband Abhishek Trivedi, and her brother-in-law, Durgesh Trivedi. On July 4, 2016, Parisha, accompanied by her uncle, Ashish Swaroop Shukla, visited her husband’s ancestral home in Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. During the visit, a conflict arose between Parisha and Durgesh over certain belongings, leading to an incident where Parisha allegedly took Durgesh’s mobile phone by mistake. Despite an immediate email explaining the error and offering to return the phone, the matter escalated into a criminal complaint, resulting in charges under Sections 451, 394, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Initially, the police filed a closure report in 2017, but the complainant, Durgesh, successfully challenged it. Fearing arrest due to the reopening of the case, Parisha and Ashish sought anticipatory bail under the newly enacted BNSS.

The central issue was whether the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail under the wider provisions of Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. The applicants contended that the allegations stemmed from a personal misunderstanding and lacked criminal intent. They also highlighted that Parisha, as a daughter-in-law, had the right to visit her husband’s home.

The court examined how the new provisions of BNSS expanded the criteria for granting anticipatory bail. Unlike the earlier provision under Section 438 of CrPC, which required courts to consider factors such as the gravity of the accusation and the potential for absconding, Section 482 of the BNSS removes these restrictive guiding factors. As observed by Justice Goutam Bhaduri:

"The new provisions delete the guiding factors which the courts hearing anticipatory bail applications may have taken into account such as the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedents, and the possibility of the accused to flee from justice."

This change gives the courts greater discretion to grant anticipatory bail, particularly in cases where the accused are unlikely to misuse their liberty. The court cited the Law Commission of India's 41st Report, which emphasized the need for anticipatory bail to protect individuals from malicious or unjustified arrests, especially in cases driven by personal vendettas or political motives.

Granting anticipatory bail to both Parisha and Ashish, the court highlighted that the applicants did not pose a flight risk and had no criminal antecedents. The court also noted the family relationship between the parties and the minor nature of the alleged offense. Justice Bhaduri further emphasized the importance of preserving personal liberty, stating:

"Liberty is the most precious of all human rights... the idea to keep the sword of arrest over the applicants is unnecessary given the nature of the allegations."

The ruling in Smt. Parisha Trivedi & Anr. vs. State of Chhattisgarh reinforces the broader discretion that courts now have under the BNSS, 2023, when granting anticipatory bail. By eliminating restrictive factors such as the gravity of the offense and criminal background, the BNSS allows courts to focus more on protecting individual liberty while still maintaining safeguards against potential misuse.

Date of Decision: 23/09/2024

Smt. Parisha Trivedi & Anr. vs. State of Chhattisgarh