1 2025:CGHC:15070 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 443 of 2025 1 - Shail Shakti Sahu @ Chhotu S/o Tankdhar Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o- Dodeetikra Ward No. 12 P.S.- Patthalgav Distt.- Jaspur (C.G.) At Present- Village Soor P.S.- Sitapur Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sitapur, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) ----Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Akhand Pratap, Adv. For State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 28.03.2025 1. This criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur in connection with crime No. 219/2024 for alleged offence punishable under Section 365, 323, 302, 201, 506, 212, 147, 120(B) pf IPC & 3(2)(V) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (CG) whereby an application filed by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that deceased Namely Sandeep Lakda was working under contractor Abhishek Pandy as Mistri and Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.03.29 12:18:18 +0530 2 committed theft of cement and TMT bar. It is alleged that the Pratush Pandey along with contractor and co-accused persons, abducted Sandeep Lakda and subjected him to physical assault resulting in his death. The body was allegedly buried in a pit, covered with concrete to destroy evidence. The prosecution claims that the appellant’s role was instrumental in providing key of ware house and destroyed the mobile of accused. Thereafter offence has been registered and charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant and others. 3. Complainant is present before this Court through virtual mode through District Legal Service Authority and raised objected in granting bail to applicant 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Prosecution story is solely based upon the circumstantial evidence, there is no evidence/material available which shows that appellant was involved in the alleged offence/crime. There is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the appellant. Co- acused persons have already enlarged on bail by the court below and this Court has also granted bail to Gauri Tiwari in CRA No. 167/2025 Vide Annexure P-2. The appellant is in jail since 06.09.2024, hence he prays that the appellant be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned State Counsel opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for appellant as well as bail application of the appellant. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, 3 statement of prosecution witnesses, role of present appellant in commission of crime/offence, further considering that co-accused have already enlarged on bail by this Court as well as by the Court below, there is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the appellant, no evidence/material is available which shows that appellant make an attempt to temper with the witnesses, detention period of the appellant, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail on parity. 8. Let appellant, Shail Shakti Sahu, involved in Crime No. 219/2024 under 365, 323, 302, 201, 506, 212, 147, 120(B) of IPC & 3(2)(V) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station – Sitapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023 (iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail 4 during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS 2023. is issued and the appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahita, 2023 (iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS 2023 If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti