1 2026:CGHC:26961 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1223 of 2026 Naresh Kumar Patel S/o Chaitram Patel Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Singarbadi, Ghutaku, Police Station- Koni, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Sagar Soni and Mr. Ankush Borkar, Advocates For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 01/07/2026 1. The victim has appeared virtually and recorded objection in granting bail to the appellant. 2. This appeal is filed second time under Section 14-A (2) of the SCST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant as he is arrested in connection with crime number 226/2026 registered at police station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.02 12:05:57 +0530 2 Sections 294, 323, 506, 313, 376 (2)(n) of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 3. The appeal which was filed for the first time was dismissed as withdrawn vide order of this Court dated 10.04.2026, passed in CRA No.818/2026. 4. By order dated 24.04.2026 passed by the Trial Court in Special Case (Atrocity) No.13/2026, the bail application filed by the appellant was rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 5. The prosecution case, in short is that from 18.03.2019 to 31.12.2025, the appellant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix and later on denied to perform marriage with her. It is further alleged that during the said period, the prosecutrix became pregnant and the appellant had given her some pills due to which her two months’ child was aborted. Based on above, offence has been registered against the appellant. 6. Learned Counsels appearing for the appellant submit that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. They further submit that there was a love affair between the appellant and the prosecutrix and both were residing together in living relationship for about 7 years. Due to some dispute between them, both were separated and a false report has been lodged by the prosecutrix. It is further submitted that nothing incriminating has come out against the appellant in the medical report of the prosecutrix. Her pregnancy report was also negative. The appellant is in jail since 20.02.2026, the charges framed on 28.04.2026 and the prosecutrix has failed to appear before the Trial Court on two occasions for recording her statement. The appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be released on bail. 3 7. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence available on record against the appellant, therefore, at this stage, the appellant may not be granted bail. 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of detention undergone by the appellant, and the fact that the case involves an alleged long-standing relationship of 6-7 years. Further, the prosecutrix has failed to appear before the Trial Court on two occasions for recording her statement, there is no report of positive pregnancy of the prosecutrix, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Without commenting further on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to release the appellant on bail. 10.Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 24.04.2026 passed by the Trial Court is set-aside. 11. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham