1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1029 of 2025 Bhupendra Kishor Vaishnav S/o Dwarika Das Vaishnav Aged About 46 Years R/o Town Hall Civil Lines, Kharsia Thana And Tahsil Kharsia District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kharsia, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. N. K. Malaviya, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 04/07/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short “the SC/ST Act”) has been preferred by the appellant against the order dated 25.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities Act), Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case under Atrocities Act No.02/2025 whereby the bail application filed by Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.05 11:43:41 +0530 2 the appellant under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with Crime No.105/2023 registered at Police Station Kharsia, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 294 of IPC and Section 3 (1)(s) of the SC/ST Act has been rejected. 2. As per the prosecution case, the appellant is alleged to have demanded Rs.50,000 in respect of entrusting of case and threatened to make the video viral if the amount was not paid. It is also alleged that the appellant abused the victim/complainant by caste name in a public place. On report being lodged in this regard, offence under the aforesaid sections has been registered against the appellant. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the appellant is in jail since 13.02.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its completion, therefore, the appellant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the said prayer and submits that there are as many as 24 previous criminal records against the appellant, the victim/complainant has not been examined till date and there is sufficient evidence available on record against the Appellant, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. No one appeared for the victim/complainant, despite service of notice. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3 7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the appellant and also considering several past criminal records of the appellant and the fact that the victim/complainant has not been examined till date, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case where the appellant can be released on bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. 9. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai