1 2025:CGHC:15811 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 545 of 2025 1 - Navtam Das Mahant @ Gautam S/o Soman Das Mahant Aged About 18 Years R/o Baradwar, P.S. Baradwar, District- Sakti (C.G.). ... appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Baradwar, District- Sakti (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For appellant : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order On Board 03/04/2025 1. pursuant to the order dated 18.03.2025, the complainant appeared through virtual mode from DLSA Sakti and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. His objection is taken on record. 2. The present appeal under Section 14A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act') has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 10-02-2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Janjgir Champa 2 whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 3. The brief facts of the case is that on 03.12.2023, the present appellant along with his two other friends namely Rahul Singh Gond and Ramavtar Bareth have assaulted the complaint by means of an axe by which he received grievous injuries on his head. The FIR has been registered against the accused persons in which the present appellant has been arrested on 06.12.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is in jail since 06.12.2023. No considerable progress in the trial is appears as till date the trial has not been concluded and two witnesses are still remain for their examination. He would also submit that with respect to the nature of injuries and disability of the complainant, there is no document available in the charge-sheet that he received such grievous injuries or he is disabled by the injuries caused by the appellant. Therefore, he may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and have submitted that the complainant is 50% disabled and he filed the disability certificate before the learned trial Court and considering the nature of injuries and the effect of his injuries which has been inflected by the present appellant, the learned trial Court has rejected the bail application of the appellant. She would also submit that out of total 12 prosecution witnesses, 8 witnesses have already been examined and the trial of the case is at its fragent, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for bail. 3 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering that the nature of injuries caused by an axe on the head of the complainant as also the trial is in progress and out of total 12 witnesses, 8 witnesses have been examined and only 04 witnesses are remained to be examined and the trial is at its fragent, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail. 7. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.04.04 12:26:26 +0530