1 2026:CGHC:27294 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1366 of 2026 1 - Rakesh Pradhan S/o Late Ramesh Pradhan, Aged About 25 Years R/o Odia Dafai, Domanhill, Chirmiri P.S. - Chirmiri, District- M.C.B. (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chirmiri, District- M.C.B. (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Deepa Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 02/07/2026 1. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 282/2025 registered at police station Chirmiri, District M.C.B. (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 69, 296, 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the victim has lodged a report on 02.11.2025 to the effect that the appellant used to commit sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage from 12.05.2025 to 01.11.2025. It is alleged that on Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.03 10:21:28 +0530 2 01.11.2025, the appellant entered into the house of victim and again committed sexual intercourse with her and when the victim asked for marriage, the appellant abused her in obscene language and threatened her. The accused despite being aware that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste, induced her with promise of marriage and later on refused to marry her. On such report, crime was registered and the appellant was arrested. 3. By order dated 13.05.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge in Crime No. 282/2025, the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this second CRA. 4. The first CRA No. 559/2026 has been rejected on merit on 13.03.2026 by this Court. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that at the time of the first CRA, the victim was not examined before the trial Court, but now the victim has been examined. He next submits that the victim was a consenting party who is 21 years old, and the appellant and the victim have a long love relationship of about 6 months. He lastly submits that the appellant is in jail since 03.11.2025, 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. 6. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that on the pretext of marriage, the appellant had a physical relationship with the victim, who supported the case of the prosecution in her statement before the Court. Therefore, at this stage, the Appellant may not be granted bail. 7. The victim and her mother appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant of bail to the appellant. 3 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 9. Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the prosecutrix is a major lady, further considering the fact that the appellant is in jail since 03.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting 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 13.05.2026 passed by the learned Trial Court is set-aside. 11. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- 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 H.L. Sahu