1 2025:CGHC:52684 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1720 of 2025 Niyazuddin Urf Rangu Khan S/o Nasaruddin Khan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Bawankera P.S. Patewa, Tehsil Mahasamund Dist- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Anjali Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 29/10/2025 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 30.07.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mahasamund, (CG) in connection with Crime No. 76/2025 registered at police station Patewa, District Mahasamund, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 64 (1), 331 (4) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 3 (2)(v) of the Schedule Caste and ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.10.31 10:29:27 +0530 2 Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that in the night of 30/05/2025 an oral dispute occurred between the prosecutrix and her husband over preparing egg curry following which the husband of the prosecutrix left the house and went to sleep to his mother’s house which is near to their house. Thereafter, the prosecutrix went to sleep after having dinner at that time approximately at about 11.45 pm, the accused who is the resident of the same village forcefully entered into the house of the prosecutrix and tried to make physical relation by gagged her mouth and committed rape with her. Upon raising alarm for help, the family members of the prosecutrix reached to the spot and caught hold of the appellant and threw him out of house and thereafter the husband of the prosecutrix also reached to the spot and the entire incident was narrated to him. Thereafter on the basis of the written complaint submitted by the complainant an FIR was registered against the appellant and after investigation he was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated and he has not committed any offence. She would next contend that the complainant herself has stated that in the night i.e. date of incident some quarrel took place between her and her husband and the husband of the prosecutrix had gone to sleep in another house, therefore, it is highly doubtful as to how the appellant, who resides at a considerable distance from the complainant’s house could have known that her husband was not present at home. She would next contend that there is contradiction and omission in her statement 3 given under Section 180 BNSS and under Section 182 of BNSS. She would next contend that the injuries were inflicted on the prosecutrix was due the assault made by the brother in law of the prosecutrix not because of forceful sexual intercourse. Lastly, she submits that the charge sheet has been filed, the appellant is in jail since 31/05/2025 and the trial will take sometime to conclude, therefore he would pray for grant of bail to the appellant. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and would submit that there is previous antecedent to the credit of the present appellant. 5. Prosecutrix appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and has raised objection. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the manner in which the offence has been committed as on the scream of the prosecutrix the family members and the neighbours reached to the place of occurrence and the injuries were found on the body part of the prosecutrix and the objection raised by the prosecutrix, it cannot be presumed that the appellant has not committed any offence, therefore, I am not inclined to allow this appeal and release the appellant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed. SD/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge ashu