1 2026:CGHC:19447 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1001 of 2026 Dharmedra Maitri S/o Rambhushan Maitri Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Khaira Bade, P.S. Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Appellant For Appellant : Shri Manoj Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate. For Non-appellant/State : Smt. Binu Sharma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 27/04/2026 1. The instant criminal appeal filed by the appellant under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act, 1989) is for grant of regular bail to him, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 89/2026 registered at Police Station – Sarangarh, Dist. Sarangarh-bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 351(2), 115(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(2)(v) of the Act, 1989. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, the appellant entered the house of the victim and tried to commit sexual intercourse with her and when she shouted, then the appellant ran away from the spot while threatening Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.04.28 10:49:07 +0530 2 her to life. Based upon the complaint, offence under the above sections has been registered against the present appellant. 3. By order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge in Crime No. 89/2026, the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is 45 years old and has married for 3 times. He further submits that the appellant is innocent and was falsely implicated in the present case as there was previous enmity between the parties. He further submits that at the time of incident, son of the victim is also present there. He lastly submits that the appellant is in jail since 26.02.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to be finalised; therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the statement of the victim itself is sufficient to prove the fact that the appellant has committed the aforesaid offence, therefore, the Appellant may not be enlarged on bail. 6. The victim appeared through V.C. from the concerned Taluka LSA and has raised objection to grant of bail to the appellant. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the appellant is in custody since 26.02.2026 and the trial is likely to take considerable time, without going into merits of the matter, this Court finds that this is a fit case, in which, the appellant should be granted bail. Accordingly, the present 3 appeal is allowed. 9. It is directed that, in the event of the appellant executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) he 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 fact to the Court, (ii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani