1 2025:CGHC:4103 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1919 of 2024 • Sachin Sen @ Monu S/o Narendra Sen Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No. 22 Kapoor Singh Dafai, Chhota Bazar Chirmiri, P.S. Chirmiri, Tahsil Chirmiri, District : Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant. versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. Chirmiri, District : Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For appellant. : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mrs. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short Special Act) is arising out of an order dated 28-9-2024 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Atrocities Act), baikunthpur, District Korea (CG) 2 in B.P. No 269 of 2024 by which the learned Special Judge has dismissed the application of the appellant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Appellant has been arrested on 16- 3-2024 in connection with Crime No. 92 of 2024 , registered at Police Station – Chirmiri, District MCB (CG) for the offfence punishable under Sections 450, 376 of IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of the Special Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16-3-2024 victim lodged a written complaint in Police Station Chirmiri, District Korea alleging that the appellant had committed sexual intercourse with her on 16-3-2024 at about 9.30 a.m,. On the basis of said complaint, Police have registered Crime No 92 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 450 and 376 of IPC and after investigation Police have added offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST Act. . 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He would further submit that the appellant is in jail since 16-3-2024 as such he has already remained in jail for more than 10 months. He would further submit that the appellant has no previous criminal antecedents and trial may take some time for final disposal, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and would submit that the appellant has insulted the complainant who is Scheduled Caste person, therefore, he may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Victim has been examined before the trial Court wherein she has stated that she used to recharge the mobile of the accused. She has also admitted that no injury was sustained to her. She has also admitted that no injury has been caused on the body of the accused. 7. This Court has asked the State counsel to submit the medical report of the victim and State counsel has submitted the medical report wherein it has been mentioned that no injury has been caused to the victim. 8. Considering the statement of the victim and also the fact that the appellant has already remained in jail for more than 10 months, charge-sheet has been filed therefore no further custodial interrogation 3 is required and also the fact that the appellant has no past criminal antecedents, therefore, I am inclined to release the appellant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 28-9-2024 passed by the Special Judge in Bail Application Case No. 269 of 2024 is quashed. It is directed that in the event of the appellant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with a surety of Rs. 25,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, then he shall be released on bail. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.01.23 10:45:25 +0530