1 2025:CGHC:45888 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1734 of 2025 1 - Shankar Kushwaha S/o Shri Moi Kushwaha Aged About 61 Years R/o Vill. Parri, P.S. Surajpur, Dist- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Divyawati Kushwaha W/o Shankar Kushwaha Aged About 50 Years R/o Vill. Parri, P.S. Surajpur, Dist- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, P.S. Surajpur District- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Indraso Singh S/o Sodhan Singh Aged About 46 Years R/o Vill- Parri, P.S. Surajpur, Dist- Surajpur, Chhattisgarh (Complainant) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mrs. Binu Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09.09.2025 1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 30.05.2025 passed by learned Special Judge Atrocities, Surajpur, District-Surajpur in C.A.N. No. 2443/2025 in Criminal SPL/SC/ST Act/27/2024 in an ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.09.15 18:09:39 +0530 2 application filed by the appellants under Section 250 of BNSS, 2023 seeking discharge from offence as alleged against them under Section 296(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(d), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.08.2024 when complainant along with his son Mohan Singh was cutting some bamboo trees planted in the land of appellants, at the relevant time, appellants came there and obstructed them from cutting those bamboo trees stating that the bamboo trees belong to them as they are planted in their land. Thereby, appellants started abusing the complainant and his son in filthy language and even threaten them to kill. Based upon the report, crime was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that complainant was cutting bamboo trees from the land of appellant no. 1, to which appellant no. 1 objected in which some dispute took place and thereafter, report was lodged alleging that appellants abused in filthy language and by caste, which is absolutely false and has only been alleged to implicate appellants for graver offence. He also submits that the reason for which some dispute took place itself is sufficient to show that appellants have not committed any offence. Learned trial court has not considered contents of FIR as also the statement from which it is appearing that the reason for dispute arose between the parties. He also contended that it is the complainant who had abused appellant no. 1 for which appellant no. 1 lodged a complaint against the complainant alleging commission of offence under Section 115(2), 296(b), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, there is counter case between the parties. 3 Hence, appellants could be discharged from alleged offences as following part of the charge-sheet. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for State opposes submission made by learned counsel for appellants and submits that the documents enclosed along with the appeal would prima facie show that appellant no. 1 has initially abused the complainant in filthy language and also by caste, thereafter appellant no. 2 also joined by way of abusing. From documents enclosed, it is appearing that there is prima facie material to proceed. Learned appellate Court rightly considered the submission of counsel for appellants and, thereafter dismissed the application under Section 250 of BNSS, 2023, hence, it does not call for any interference. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents enclosed. 6. Perusal of FIR which was lodged on 24.08.2024 for the alleged commission of offence would show that on 24.08.2024 at about 10:30 PM appellants have obstructed the work done by complainant and, thereafter have also abused her in filthy language and also by caste. The allegation leveled in FIR and the statement of complainant recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, 2023 is supported by independent witnesses Sudraj Singh and Surendra Vishwakarma, in their statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, 2023. 7. At the stage of filing of charge-sheet and considering application for discharge, Court has only to see whether there is prima facie material available against accused persons to proceed and not to consider whether allegations leveled against accused persons can lead to conviction as it is a subject matter of the trial. 4 8. The defence taken by appellant that against complainant also FIR was lodged can be one of defence and it may be the subject matter of evidence and can be appreciated, only during course of trial. 9. For the forgoing discussion, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal being sans merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge alfiza