K.C.G., C.G v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. Khairaga
Case Details
Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.05.14 15:47:49 +0530 2025:CGHC:21771 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 738 of 2025 Dr. Yogendra Choubey S/o Late Kaleedin Choubey Aged About 50 Years Adhisthata - Lok Sangeet And Kala Sankay, Indira Kala Sangeet Vishwavidyalaya Khairagarh C.G. Present Address Teachers Colony Chamber No. -1 Khairagarh District- K.C.G., C.G. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant
Legal Reasoning
: Shri Vineet K Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ : Ms Priya Sharma, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 09.05.2025 1. Pursuant to order dated 11.04.2025, victim appeared in person before this Court and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. She submits that she would not be safe if the appellant be released on bail, because his family members are still chasing her whenever she goes out of her house. Her objection/statement is taken on record. 2. Present appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, ‘SC/ST 2 Cra 738 of 2025 Act’) has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Rajnandgaon, in Remand Case-93 of 2025, whereby the regular bail application of the appellant filed under Section 439 CrPC has been rejected. 3. Appellant is the accused for the offence in Crime No.93 of 2025, registered at Police Station-Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh, Chhuikhadan Gandai for the offence under Section 354, 354(A), 354(D), 506, 509 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, who has been arrested on 29.03.2025 and detained in jail. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the victim has made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Police Station-Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh, Chhuikhadan Gandai, which was forwarded to the Police Station- Khairagarh for its enquiry. The victim has also made a complaint to the National Commission for women through online in which she alleged that she was a student of BPA in Theatre Department at Indira Kala Vishwavidyalaya Khairagarh. She was being sexually exploited by her Teacher, present applicant, and went in depression. When she again had gone to the department for her re-admission, present applicant again started teasing the victim, and tried to make physical relation with her, on which she immediately reported to the Women’s Cell of the University, but no action was taken against him. In the complaint made to the Superintendent of Police, she alleged that during the Covid-19 Pandemic, and due to her poor financial condition, she could not continue 3 Cra 738 of 2025 her course, and when she approached the appellant, he proposed that if she sexually cooperate with him, then only she would be re-admitted in the College. When she had gone to New Delhi for her treatment, the appellant again called her to the Ashoka Hotel, where also he tried to outrage her modesty, and thereafter, she made complaint to the University. On the complaint made by the victim, FIR has been registered against the appellant on 29.03.2025, and he has been arrested on the same day. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the victim had got admitted in the University in the year 2019-2020. In the year 2020-21 during Covid-19 Pandemic, and lock-down, all the students were imparting education through online mode. The victim had also appeared in the examination, but could not succeeded, and has failed. In the session 2021-2022, when the university was reopened, the victim had not come for her admission, and since 4-5 years, appellant has not visited her. She made allegation in the year 2023 that she was intentionally got failed by the teacher/appellant, and made a complaint on 10.08.2023, whereas she claimed the irregular evaluation of her answer-sheets of the year 2021. She has not cleared BPA Theatre Semesters 1, 2, 3 and 4 and there was backlog, and only to build pressure upon the appellant, to get her examination cleared, she made allegation against him. He would also submit that on 08.09.2023, the Registry of the Indira Kala Vishwavidyalaya, Khairagarh has made a request to the Police for proper enquiry into the matter. He would further submit that in her report, she 4 Cra 738 of 2025 stated that she was sexually exploited by the appellant since last two years, whereas in her report to the Superintendent of Police, she stated that when she had gone to Delhi for her treatment, the appellant called her at Ashoka Hotel, and tried to outrage her modesty. Had she been sexually exploited since last two years by the appellant, she would not have go there, or she would have lodged the report immediately. It is also submitted that it is only pressure tactics upon the appellant to get her examinations cleared, which the appellant denied to do, and the same was resulted into his arrest in the appeal. The appellant is a respectable person of the Society, and Assistant Professor in the University. He is in jail since 29.03.2025. Keeping him in custody would frustrate his future career. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that from the FIR as well as the statement of the victim, prima facie offence is there that the appellant sexually exploited the victim by misusing his dominating position that he is her Teacher. Considering the gravity of the offence, appellant is not entitled for bail. Statement of the victim is supported by the statement of other witnesses, and the manner in which she was subjected to suffer the offence by the appellant, therefore, appellant is not entitled for bail. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary. 5 Cra 738 of 2025 8. Perusal of the case-diary would show that on 29.03.2025, FIR has been registered against the present appellant for the aforesaid offences in which she alleged that she was sexually exploited by the appellant since last two years. Victim is a student of BPA Theatre department at Indira Kala Sangeet Vishwavidyalaya, Khairagarh. From the case-diary, it also reveals that she made a complaint to the National Commission for Women on 27.09.2023. Before this, on 10.08.2023, she also made complaint to the Women Cell of the Khairagarh University alleging in it that the appellant has made pressure upon her for sexual favour with him, or else, she would be failed in her examination, and when she had gone with him to submit her examination form, he refused to accept it. When she repeatedly approached him, he asked for sexual favour, and then, she reported back to her house, and went in depression. It is also alleged in the complaint that when she had gone to Delhi for her treatment, he also called her at Ashoka Hotel, and repeated his proposal. Another complaint was made on 12.09.2023, by the victim in the University to take action against the appellant. However, the University has made their communication to the Police authorities on 08.09.2023 for investigating the matter. It is also informed by the Registrar of the University to the victim in response to her application dated 10.08.2023 that on 02.06.2021 soft copy of the Answer sheets of BPA 5th Semester, Theatre subject through Email of one Hari Om Singh Rajput but it was not the external examination and it was the internal examination, and evaluation of the same was already taken place, and tabulation has also 6 Cra 738 of 2025 been done. The soft copy, and hard copy of the Theater subject of BPA 5th Semester have not been received by the examination cell, even the video of practical examination of theater Course-2, and Course-3 of BPA Semester have not been received by the examination cell. Further, the computer application examination of BPA 5th Semester was held on 15.06.2021 but soft copy and hard copy of the victim have not been received by the Examination cell, hence, there is backlog in the BPA Theatre 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Semesters. From the material collected during investigation, it appears that there was a dispute with respect to the academic curriculum of the victim, which culminated into lodging FIR in which the appellant has been arrested on 29.03.2025. 9. Considering the position of the appellant in the University, nature of dispute between the parties, communication made by the appellant, University, as well as the victim, further that the appellant is in jail since 29.03.2025, and final adjudication of the case will take its own time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled for release on bail. 10. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant- Dr Yogendra Choubey, s/o late Kaleedin Choubey, is allowed and the impugned order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (CG) in Remand Praptra Apradh No.93 of 2025 is set aside, and the appellant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one 7 Cra 738 of 2025 surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The appellant shall also abide by the 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 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; and 3) that the appellant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 11. It is made clear that any observation made in this order is restricted only for consideration of the present appeal. The learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made in this order. Certified copy as per rules. padma Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE