1 2025:CGHC:11515 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 308 of 2025 Premlal Sahu S/o Sonau Ram Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Sajapali, P.S. Sarsiwa, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants(s) versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station House Officer, Police Station, Sarsiwan, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Karan Bahrani, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07/03/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14-A(ii) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, 'Act of 1989') is filed against impugned rejection order dated 23.01.2025 (Annexure A-1), whereby appellant’s application filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. for grant of anticipatory bail, has been rejected. 2. Appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.263/2023 registered at PS -Sarsiwan, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 454, 354 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)b(1) of the Act of 1989. 3. Case of the prosecution in brief is that husband of the victim/prosecutrix is a driver and he used to live outside the house, victim alongwith her two children are living in the house. On 16.07.2023, the appellant entered in 2 the house of victim and caught hold of her stating that he will adopt her, at that time, husband of victim came to the house and the appellant ran away from the spot. Based upon report lodged by the victim, initially the FIR was registered against the applicant for offence under Section 454 & 354 of IPC and he was arrested by the Police. However, appellant was granted regular bail by Court below. Subsequently, offence U/s 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)b(1) of the Act of 1989 was added and charge -sheet has been filed before the concerned Special Court. The appellant was not aware about filing of said charge- sheet and after come to know about adding of offence under the Act of 1989, the appellant filed anticipatory bail application before the learned Special Court, which came to be rejected vide impugned order. Hence this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. The learned Court below has not considered the facts and grounds properly while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The appellant was not aware about filing of charge-sheet under the Act of 1989 as he was out of station for earning livelihood. Hence, it is prayed that appellant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. In support of his bail application, he relied upon the order dated 27.08.2024 passed by co- ordinat bench of this Court in CRA No.1110/2024, 5. Learned State Counsel opposing the bail application of the appellant. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Victim is appeared before this Court by virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. 3 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions of counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that initially FIR was registered against the applicant for offence under Section 454 & 354 of IPC and he was granted regular bail by Court below, subsequently, offence u/s 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)b(1) of the Act of 1989 was added, charge -sheet has been filed and appellant was not intimating by the Court concerned about the said charge-sheet as per statement of counsel for the appellant, further considering the order dated 27.08.2024 passed by co-ordinate bench of this Court in CRA No.1110/2024, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal and grant anticipatory bail application to the appellants. 9. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Impugned order (Annexure P-1) is set aside. It is directed that in the event of arrest of appellant in connection with crime in question, he shall be released on bail by the Officer Arresting him on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Arresting Officer. Appellant shall also abide by the following conditions : (i) that appellant shall make himself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that appellant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that appellant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-