1 2025:CGHC:54972 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1629 of 2025 1 - Ali Sher Ansari S/o Mohd. Samsul Haq Ansari Aged About 24 Years R/o. Kantiprakashpur, Thana- Ambikapur, Distt- Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Station House Officer, Police Station- Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Shri Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms.Priya Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 11/11/2025 This appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as “Special Act”) has been filed against the order dated 26.07.2025 passed SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.11.13 11:14:06 +0530 2 by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Ambikapur, District Surguja in connection with Crime No. 474/2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 333,329(4), 74,296 and 351(3) of BNS and Section 3 (1)(w)(i) and (ii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the report was lodged by victim against the present applicant alleging that on the date of incident,when she was alone at her residence,the applicant entered her house and caught hold of her with the intention to outrage her modesty. It is further alleged that there was a love affair between them; however, when the appicant proposed her for marriage, she refused on the ground that he belongs to different religion. Consequently, on thesaid report, FIR was registered against the appellant as stated above. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecutrix is major. He submits that the prosecutrix has lodged the report due to societal pressure and that they were having love affair since three years. He further submits that the charge sheet has been filed, the appellant is in jail since 19.07.2025 and therefore he would pray for grant of bail to the appellant. 4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application. 5. The victim appeared through the concerned DLSA and she has raised no objection. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the prosecutrix was major and further looking to the fact that the charge 3 sheet has been filed and the appellant is in jail since 19.07.2025, this Court is of the considered opinion that present is a fit case to grant bail to the appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the appellant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court, he shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions: i) That the appellant shall furnish a specific undertaking that while on bail, he will not commit any such offence, otherwise bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and shall co-operate the prosecution during trial. ii) that the accused/appellant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. iii) That the accused/appellant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge