1 2025:CGHC:37366 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1353 of 2025 • Upendra Prajapati, S/o Late Devnath Prajapati, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward 03, Ektanagar, Khongapani, District M.C.B. (C.G.). ... Appellant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Jhagrakhand, District M.C.B. (C.G.). ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For State/respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 30/07/2025 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act of 1989’) for grant of regular bail to the appellant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.38/2025 registered at Police Station Jhagrakhand, District Manendragarh – Chirmiri – Bharatpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 69 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(2)(V) of SC and ST Act (as per the charge sheet). 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 30.03.2025, victim lodged a written complaint against the present appellant in the Jhagrakhand Police Station that there was a love relationship between the present appellant & her and she knows him since last three years. Appellant assured the victim that he will marry the her, hence she believed on his statement and on that basis DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA 2 appellant established physical relation with her on 11.07.2024. Again on 01.08.2024 appellant again established the physical relation with the victim, as a result of which she got pregnant, upon which she informed the appellant about her pregnancy and asked him to marry her, but the appellant started avoiding victim and later appellant refused to marry her. Thereafter, time passes and victim became 8 months pregnant. Based on the above facts, present case has been registered against the present appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that the FIR was registered on 30.03.2025. It is further submitted that there was 3 years consensual relation between the appellant and victim. He further submits that they performed the marriage, but family of the appellant was not accepting their relation and refused to keep her with them. He further submits that victim does not raise any objection with regard to their relationship. The appellant is in jail since 24.04.2025, charge sheet has been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the appellant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the appellant and submitted that appellant has established physical relation with the victim on the basis of casteism. He further submits that victim delivered a child and the report of DNA test is also positive, therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the fact that victim is a young lady aged about 23 years and also considering the fact that there was a consensual relationship between both the parties. Further, considering the fact that victim does not raise any objection against the appellant, lastly considering the fact that charge has been filed and 3 appellant is in custody since 24.04.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Upendra Prajapati, present appellant is released on regular bail and is directed that the he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned, for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge