1 2025:CGHC:55688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2192 of 2025 Meshant Shitlani S/o Gangaram Shitlani Aged About 31 Years R/o Madhav Nagar, Near Post Office Katni, P.S. Madhav Nagar, District Katni (M.P.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Rudri, District Dhamtari C.G. --- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 14/11/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') is filed against impugned rejection order dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure A-1), whereby appellants' application filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of bail is rejected. 2. Appellant is in jail since 15.09.2025 in connection with Crime 2 No.28/2025 registered at Police Station -Rudri, District Dhamtari C.G., for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)m of the BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that prosecutrix on 02/08/2025 lodged the first information report (F.I.R.) against the present appellant alleging that she had known the appellant since the year 2022 through her friend, and, thereafter they exchanged their mobile numbers and started talking to each other. The appellant on the pretext of marriage made sexual relation with the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix further alleged that when she got a job at Mekahara Hospital, Raipur, then she used to live in a rented house in Lofesar Colony. The appellant used to came to meet the prosecutrix and many times the appellant made sexual relations with her, when the prosecutrix asked the appellant about marriage then he denied to marry her. Based upon report, FIR was registered against the appellant and he has been arrested in the aforesaid crime/offence. 4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Victim is a major lady aged about 31 years and there was love affair between the appellant and the victim. Applicant is in jail since 15.09.2025, charge-sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial may take time, hence, appellant may be released on bail. 5. Learned State Counsel opposing submission of counsel for the appellant. 6. Heard counsel for respective parties. 3 7. Pursuant to order of this Court, victim appeared before this Court by virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and she raised objection in granting bail to applicant. 8. Considering entire facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions of counsel for the parties, material/evidence available in the case diary, further considering that victim is a major lady aged about 31 years and there was love affair between the appellant and the victim, detention period of appellant, I am inclined to allow this appeal. 9. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Impugned rejection order (Annexure A-1) is set aside. It is directed that appellant shall be released on regular bail upon his furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:- a) Appellant shall appear before trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. b) Appellant shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-