1 2025:CGHC:53123 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2106 of 2025 Suryakant Gangwar S/o Shri Jayanti Prasad Gangwar Aged About 35 Years R/o Bisalpur, Bangali Baba Mandir Street, Pilibhit (Uttar Pradesh) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Pallav Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. For Complainant : Complainant in person. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.10.2025 1. The appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside of order dated 24.09.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge ST/SC (PA) Act, Rajnandgaon, and for grant of anticipatory bail, as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 229/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69-A, 351(3), 375(2)(N) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act Section and Section 3(2)(V) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 which was added during the course ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.10.31 11:30:08 +0530 2 of trial. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant was granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 1247 of 2025 vide order dated 29.08.2025, for which the FIR was registered under Sections 69 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. He further submits that during the course of investigation, Section 375(2)(N) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act were added. Therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 3. On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the present applicant, the learned trial Court observed that, as per Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, anticipatory bail cannot not be granted to the applicant. 4. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 15.10.2025, the victim appeared through District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and raised strong objection. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is noticed that the present appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for grant of anticipatory bail is not maintainable in view of the statutory bar under Section 18 of the Act. "18. Section 438 of the Code not to apply to persons committing an offence under the Act.--Nothing in section 438 of the Code shall apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of 3 having committed an offence under this Act. 18A. No enquiry or approval required.-- (1) For the purposes of this Act,-- (a) preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of a First Information Report against any person; or (b) the investigating officer shall not require approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any person, against whom an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act has been made and no procedure other than that provided under this Act or the Code shall apply. (2) The provisions of section 438 of the Code shall not apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court." 6. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed on the ground of maintainability, with liberty to the appellant to avail the appropriate remedy available to him under the law before the competent forum. 7. Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order to the counsel for the appellant after retaining the photostat copy of the same. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek