1 / 3 2025:CGHC:57478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2381 of 2025 1 - Pokhraj Sinha S/o Pannalal Sinha Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Saja, P.S. Gunderdehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh 2 - Raghunandan Sinha S/o Late Phool-Singh Sinha Aged About 50 Years (Note Mentioned In The Impugned Order) R/o Village Saja, P.S. Gunderdehi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Gunderdehi District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellants : Mr. Vidya Bhushan Soni, Advocate For State /Respondent : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA along with Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 26/11/2025 1. The instant appeal under Section 14A (II) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28/10/2025 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.28 10:36:45 +0530 2 / 3 passed in Bail Application No.381/2025 by the learned Special Judge SC & ST (P.A.) Act, Balod, C.G. whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellants has been rejected. 2. The appellants have preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.298/2025 registered in Police Station Gunderdehi, District Balod, C.G. for offence punishable under sections 296, 351(3), 115(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections 3 (1) (iii), 2(5) of SC/ST Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, on 15/10/2025 at about 15.00 PM in front of a liquor shop on the main road in Gunderdehi, the appellants allegedly confronted the complainant and asked him to marry with the daughter of appellant No.2 and started abusing the complainant and also extended threat to kill. Thereafter, the appellants removed the clothes of the complainant and took out his naked parade. Thereafter, on the basis of the complaint made by the complainant the offences were registered against them and the appellants were arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the complainant has sexually exploited the daughter of Appellant No.2 and the appellants went to make request him to marry the daughter. He would next contend that the instant FIR is the counterblast of the FIR registered against the complainant and he is in judicial custody. He would next contend that just in order to falsely implicate the present appellants the instant FIR has been lodged. He would therefore submit that the appellants are in jail since 16/10/2025 and the trial will take some more time to conclude, 3 / 3 therefore, the appellants may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 6. The complainant appeared before this Court through video conferencing from Jail Balod along with Mr. S.P. Kurrey, Assistant Jail Superintendent, Jail Balod, C.G. and he objected for grant of bail to the appellant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 8. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the gravity of offence as the appellants took the naked parade of the complainant in public and beaten him and also considering the fact that the complainant is the member of Schedule Tribe Community and the atrocities committed with him, I am not inclined to release the appellants on bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu