1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1503 of 2025 1 - Mohmad Sonu S/o Akhter Ali Aged About 22 Years R/o Village - Chhajayshi Colony Noida, Thana - Bahlonpur, District - Gautam Buddh Nagar (U.P.)., Uttar Pradesh ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Ambikapur District Surguja (District - Wrongly Type In Impugned Order), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. A.K. Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Baharani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 25/08/2025 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 appellant as he is arrested in connection with crime number 274/2025 registered at police station Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(2)(V) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.08.26 10:32:27 +0530 2 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the allegation against the appellant is that on 24.04.2025, the appellant took the minor victim from the lawful guardianship of her parents on the pretext of marriage. Subsequently, the appellant, along with the minor victim, was caught at Katini Railway Station on 26.04.2025. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present appellant. 3. By order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge in Case No. 22/2025, the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that, as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., she herself has stated to go with the appellant, and there is no allegation of sexual offence. He lastly submits that the appellant is in jail since 26.04.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the victim has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., therefore, at this stage, the Appellant may not be granted bail. 6. The victim along with her father, appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and recorded no objection to grant bail to the appellant. 7. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 3 8. Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the victim has not supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and there is no allegation of sexual offence. Further considering the fact that the victim and her father has no objection in granting bail to the appellant and the appellant is in jail since 26.04.2025 and the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting on other merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to release the appellant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court is set- aside. 10.It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu