1 2025:CGHC:32800 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1196 of 2025 1 - Nand Kumar Patel S/o Thunuram Patel Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Anwari, Tippara, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.), (As Per Final Report) 2 - Kamlesh Netam S/o Mahruram Netam Aged About 20 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Anwari, Tippara, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.), (As Per Final Report) 3 - Laxmi Netam S/o Budhu Ram Netam Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Anwari, Tippara, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.), (As Per Final Report) 4 - Mahendra Markam S/o Late Jaggu Ram Markam Aged About 24 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Anwari, Tippara, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.), (As Per Final Report) 5 - Sonaram Markam S/o Dhaniram Markam Aged About 26 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Anwari, Tippara, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.), (As Per Final Report) ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Keshkal, District - Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellants : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Deepak Diwakar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.07.15 10:35:33 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/07/2025 1. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellants as they are arrested in connection with Crime No. 108/2024 registered at police station Keshkal, District Kondagaon (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 70(1), 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(2)(va) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 29.08.2024, the prosecutrix aged about 19 years lodged a written report stating therein that on 09.08.2024 when she went to Keshkal along with neighbour sisters thereafter after purchasing articles when they were returning at about 6:00 pm, they went to Bedma and one of her neighbour went to Bahigaon thereafter the prosecutrix make phone call to appellant No. 2 Kamlesh Netam and request to drop her home. Thereafter, Appellant No. 2 and his friend Nand Kumar Patel, Appellant No. 1, came on their motorcycle. They went to Kekti Plot, Anwari, and there Appellant No. 2 called their 3 more friends. They caught the prosecutrix and tried to catch the prosecutrix's neighbour friend, but she ran away from the spot; after that, all the appellants committed forceful sexual intercourse and threatened not to disclose and ran away from the spot. Thereafter, on 27.08.2024 prosecutrix disclosed the incident ot his brother and her cousin's aunt, and she lodged the FIR. Based on the above, offence was registered against the Appellants. 3 3. By order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge in Special Criminal Case No. 10/2024, the bail application filed by the appellants has been rejected against which the appellants has filed this appeal. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants submits that the Appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that prima facie there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR because, as per the prosecutrix's version, the date of the incident was 09.08.2024 and the written report was lodged by the prosecutrix on 29.08.2024. He also submits that only 8 witnesses out of 33 witnesses have been examined till date. He lastly submits that charge sheet has been filed, the appellants are in jail since 30.08.2024, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellants may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence available on record against the Appellants. The charge-sheet has been filed and it is matter of gang rape, therefore, at this stage, the Appellants may not be enlarged on bail. 6. The victim, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant bail to the appellants. 7. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 8. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and also looking to the nature of offence and the evidence collected by the prosecution against the 4 appellants, without commenting on merits of the case, at this state, I am not inclined to release the appellants on bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 10. However, considering the fact that the applicants are in jail since 30.08.2024, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 11.Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu