High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.05.08 11:39:05 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 689 of 2025 NAFR 1 - Anurag Kesharwani S/o Late Chandrashekhar Kesharwani Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Musmalda, Police Station Sarsinwa, District Sarangarh Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh. versus ... Appellant 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sarangarh, District Sarangarh Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant For State For complainant : : :
Legal Reasoning
Shri Aman Kesharwani, Advocate. Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Shri Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board 07.05.2025 1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section 14(A)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, 'the Act, 1989') against order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act) Raigarh, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.47/2025 registered at Police Station, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, for the offence under Sections 296, 351(2), 79 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(2)(va) of the Act, 1989, has been rejected. 2. Case of prosecution, in brief is that, on 06.02.2025 a written complaint 2 was made by the complainant to the police alleging that earlier she lodged a report against the appellant with respect to commission of the offence of rape upon her in which he was in jail and when he released from jail on bail, he regularly threatened her with dire consequence and to get her video viral. On 04.02.2025 when she was in her house, the appellant came there and started abusive language in the name of her caste and also threatened her that she will be roped in a false case of sex racket. On the basis of written complaint, an FIR was registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 296, 351(2) and 79 of BNS and Section 3(2)(va) of the Act, 1989, in which the appellant has been arrested on 28.02.2025 and after investigation charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that earlier the victim had lodged a report for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 IPC in which vide order dated 23.04.2024 passed in MCrC No.2536 of 2024, the Co-ordinate Bench of this court has granted bail to the appellant. Thereafter, at the time of filing of charge sheet, the offence under the Act, 1989 were added and then the appellant was released on anticipatory bail vide order dated 27.08.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1110 of 2024 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court. In order to create pressure upon the appellant and to keep him inside jail, the victim/complainant again lodged a report on 06.02.2025 raising allegation that appellant is threatening her in which he was again arrested and he is still in jail since 28.02.2025. He would further submit that except the offence under the Act, 1989, the other offences are bailable. Appellant is not having any criminal antecedent except the 3 report made by victim under Section 376 IPC. He would also submit that the complainant regularly threatened him that she will keep him inside the jail throughout the proceeding which was reported by him to the police, but no action was taken and ultimately he filed a complaint case before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhatgaon against the accused persons including the complainant which is pending consideration. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand the counsel for the State as well as complainant/objector vehemently opposes the submission so made and submits that appellant regularly threatened the victim for which she was compelled to reside outside the village. It is only when her mother got ill, she came back to village and thereafter the appellant again started threatening her that she will be roped in a false case of sex racket for which she lodged the report. The appellant abused the complainant in the name of her caste. Therefore, there is sufficient material available on record and as such the appellant is not entitled for bail. They would also submit that an application for cancellation of bail is pending against the appellant before this court and therefore he is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. After hearing the parties and perusal of documents annexed with the appeal, the undisputed facts emerges are that, earlier the appellant was arrested for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 IPC and he was released on bail vide order dated 23.04.2024 thereafter he was granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this court on 4 27.08.2024 and then the offences under the Act, 1989 have been added in the charge sheet. On the report of same victim, the present FIR has been registered. Further there are complaint made by both the parties. A complaint case is also pending consideration before the JMFC, Bhatgaon where the present appellant is the complainant. Thus, in view of aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations in the FIR, in the opinion of this court, the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act, 1989 would not be attracted against the appellant for considering the present bail application. Therefore, it will fall within the exceptional case. 7. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act) Raigarh in Crime No.47/2025 is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court on following conditions: 1. That, the appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; 2. That, the appellant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; 3. That, the appellant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder