1 2025:CGHC:8510 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 111 of 2025 Prabhupratap S/o Harinarayan Tandon Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Jaitpur, Police Station Sarsiva, Tahsil Sarsiva, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station Jaijaipur, District Sakti C.G.. --- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Karan Ku. Bahrani, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 18/02/2025 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 impugned rejection order dated 29.11.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Janjgir-Champa, (CG) whereby appellant’s application filed under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of bail is rejected. 2 2. Appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 242/2024 registered at Police Station –Jaijaipur, District -Sakti, (CG), for offence punishable under Sections 376 read with Section 34 of IPC; Section 3(1)(xii) & 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that appellant has established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage, taken the obscene videos with the help of co-accused and also threatened to kill her and viral the said videos. Based upon report, FIR was registered against the appellant and he has been arrested. 4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Appellant has already married with the victim/complainant by performing community rituals and the marriage was solemnized infront of family members on 30-06-2024. After the marriage, victim started residing in the house of appellant, but she was habitual of cigarette and liquor and used to compel the appellant to bring the same for her. Victim has pressurizing the appellant to get separate from his family members, which was denied by the appellant. Victim was also having some extra- marital relation with some other person namely Abhishek Chandra, who invited in the house of appellant in his absence and also made physical relation with her, which was recorded in the CCTV Camera. When appellant asked her about the said thing, she admitted her relation with other person and also admitted that she is already married before marriage with the appellant. The appellant realized that victim has cheated him, he made an application before the learned Additional District Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act. Appellant has also made a complaint before the 3 Police Station -Sarsiva stating the said facts on 11-10-2024, but the police authorities registered the case under Section 174 of B.N.S.S. and did not take any action against the victim. Learned Counsel contended that in the counter blast, victim has made complaint against the appellant with the intention to implicate him in the false case by hiding the fact of marriage. Vide order dated 29.01.2025, co-accused has been granted bail by the Court below. Hence, it is prayed that appellant may also be granted anticipatory bail. Learned Counsel lastly submitted that if the case of prosecution is taken as it is, the offence of SC/ST Act would not be attracted in this case because the appellant is also belonging to the SC/ST community. 5. Learned State Counsel opposing submission of counsel for the appellant and would submit that looking to the nature of offence, appellant may not be granted anticipatory bail. 6. Heard counsel for respective parties. 7. Pursuant to order of this Court, victim is appeared before this Court and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. She also submits that family members of the appellant/accused has threatened her to withdraw the case registered against the appellant. Her submission is recorded. 8. Considering entire facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, statement of prosecutrix/victim, the fact that appellant has established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage, taken her obscene videos with the help of co-accused and threatened to viral the said videos, further considering that as per statement of victim before this Court family members of the appellant/accused has threatened her for withdrawal of the case registered against the appellant, I am not inclined 4 to allow this appeal. 9. Accordingly, appeal is hereby dismissed/rejected. However, if the appellant files application for grant of regular bail after his surrender, learned Court below shall consider and decide the same, if possible, on same day in accordance with law, if there is no any legal impediment. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-