1 2025:CGHC:61501 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2503 of 2025  Rajesh Yadav S/o Hemant Yadav Aged About 22 Years R/o Parsoda P.S. And District- Balod Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ajak District- Balod Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Aditya Srivastav, Advocate. For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 17.12.2025 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 昀椀led against impugned rejection order dated 18.11.2025 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Balod District Balod (CG) whereby application of the appellants 昀椀led under Section 483 of BNSS for their release on bail is rejected. 2. On 01.12.2025, the victim/complainant present before this Court and he has raised objection in releasing the appellant on bail. Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.12.20 13:19:21 +0530 2 3. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has lodged report and stated that on dated 08/09/2025 at about 04:00pm near the Bindas chowk village parsoda they were immersion the idol of Lord Ganesh by Ganesh Samiti in which they were dancing by wearing white Kurta piajama and not using the colors then at that time the present applicant came there with drunken condition and started to spreading the colours over the complainant, Fanish yadav Dhaneshwar Sahu and another member of samiti and when the complainant has tried to stop him then the present applicant has started to caste abuse and also threatened them and thereafter the police has registered the case against the present applicant. On the basis of report lodged by the Complainant the o昀昀ence under Section 296, 351(3), of BNS,2023 and section 3(1) (द) (ध) of Prevention of atrocities Act has been registered against the appellant 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present appellant has gone there for celebrating of Ganesh immersion but the complainant has started to abuse him due to previous enmity. In the entire charge sheet it does not appear that the present appellant has abused on caste to the complainant. The present appellant never consumed liquor and when the complainant has denied him to celebrate Ganesh immersion, thereafter the present appellant went back to his home. The present appellant is 23 years and he has no any previous antecedent of any o昀昀ence. On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays that 3 the appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Act of 1989 be allowed, the impugned order dated 18.11.2025 be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail in the interest of justice. Hence he prays for release of appellant on bail in the interest of justice. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 6. Learned counsel for the Objector opposed the bail appeal of the appellants. 7. Heard counsel for respective parties, perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8. Prima facie, from the contents of the FIR and the charge-sheet, the allegations appear to have arisen out of a sudden altercation during the Ganesh immersion ceremony and there is nothing on record to suggest any premeditated act or deliberate intention to humiliate the complainant on the basis of caste. The appellant is a young person aged about 23 years, has no criminal antecedents, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. In these circumstances, and without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court 昀椀nds that the appeal 昀椀led under Section 14-A(2) of the Act of 1989 is allowed, the impugned order dated 18.11.2025 is set aside, and the appellant is directed to be released on bail 9. Let the appellant be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions : 4 (i) The appellants shall ile an undertaking to the e昀昀ect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates ixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date 昀椀xed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without su昀케cient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 269 of BNS, 2023. (iii) In case, the appellants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 is issued and the appellants fail to appear before the court on the date 昀椀xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS, 2023. (iv) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 昀椀xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellants is deliberate or without suicient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law. 10. O昀케ce is directed to send a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti