1 2025:CGHC:18453 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 708 of 2025 Manav Sidar S/o Late Puniram Sidar Aged About 23 Years R/o Budhwari Bazar, Sakti, Ward No.-13, Police Station - Sakti, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Sakti, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate. For Respondent-State: Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 23.04.2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') is filed against the order dated 19.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, Atrocities Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh (Annexure A/1). 2. Appellant is alleged to be an accused in connection with Crime No.404/2023 registered at Police Station – Sakti, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 294, 506, 323, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.12.2023 at about 1 PM complainant Ramji and deceased Budhwari Bazar Sakti, Rahul Yadav, Sohel Khan and Manav Sidar have come and they were demanding chilam from complainant. The complainant denied upon which they used filthy language and then deceased Raju defended himself upon which they again used filthy language and threatened him to kill and beaten by 2 hand and fists. Sohel Khan injured head of Raju by stick and as a consequence during treatment Raju died. Thereafter the report was lodged. 4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and is falsely implicated in the present case. There is no recovery made from the present appellant. The appellant has been accused on the basis of memorandum only. He further contended that the co-accused has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 28.02.2025 passed in CRA No. 248 of 2025. The appellant is in jail since 30.12.2023. Hence pleads for granting of bail in the interest of justice. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 6. Victim of the case appeared before this court and raised her objection on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant for grant of bail. 7. Heard counsel for respective parties, perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, statement of the complainant, submission of the counsel for the appellant and specially to the fact that the main accused of the case is Sohel Khan and the other co-accused of the same case has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 28.02.2025 passed in CRA No. 248 of 2025, this court finds its fit to allow the bail application of the present applicant. 9. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Impugned rejection order 19.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, Atrocities, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh is set aside.It is directed that in the event of arrest by the Police Officer appellant shall be released on bail upon his 3 furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer on the following conditions that:- a) Appellant shall appear before trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. b) Appellant shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses. c) Appellant shall in any manner will not threaten the complainant of the case. d) Appellant will give his full co-operation whenever the Police Officer will ask him to come for inquiry. e) Appellant in any manner will take full participation in resolving the case and will not ask for unnecessary adjournment. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza