1 2025:CGHC:4684 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 2179 of 2024 1. Dhaneshwar Kashyap S/o Late Bhagwat Kashyap, Aged About 22 Years, 2. Dhanraj Kashyap S/o Anuj Kashyap, Aged About 22 Years, 3. Udit Narayan Sahu S/o Babulal Sahu, Aged About 21 Years All are R/o Village-Katoud, P.S.-Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through-District Magistrate, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). --- Respondent For Appellants : Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, PL For Objector : Mr. Sushil Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 27/01/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled 2 Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') is filed against impugned rejection of bail order dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Crime No.450/2024, whereby appellants' application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of bail is rejected. 2. In connection with Crime No.450/2024 registered at Police Station – Nawagarh, District Jangir-Champa, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 296(1)(b), 298, 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3(2)(V)(A), 3(1)(R)(S) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.11.2024, the complainant moved a written complaint before the PS Nawagarh, District Janjgir- Champa stated that on 31.10.2024 at about 09:30 PM, some people came at Ambedkar Chowk and intensely they broken the Toran/Flag and when the Complainant stopped them than they abused him related to his caste. On the basis of said complaint, the matter was registered against the appellants. 4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellants has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against them. He further submits that the appellants No.1 & 2 moved written complaint on 01.11.2024 against the Complainant and other persons and on the basis of written complaint, FIR No.425/2024 under 3 Sections 126(2), 324(4), 296, 115(2), 3(5) of BNS. As counterblast, the present FIR has lodged by the complainant. Hence, it is prayed that the instant bail application may be allowed in the interest of justice. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants. 6. I have heard counsel for respective parties and perused the impugned rejection order of bail. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of case, further considering the nature and gravity of offence and submission of counsel for the parties, it is not a fit case where the benefit of anticipatory bail can be given to the appellants. 8. Section 18-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 provides that “The provisions of Section 438 of the Code shall not apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court.” 9. Accordingly, the present appeal of the appellants filed under Section 14- A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in connection with Crime No.450/2024 registered at Police Station – Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 296(1)(b), 298, 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3(2)(V)(A), 3(1)(R)(S) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is rejected. 4 10. However, a direction issued to the concerned Court below that if the appellants file an application for grant of regular bail after their surrender, learned Court below may consider and decide the same on its own merits, if possible, on the same day in accordance with law without consider the observation of this Court. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR