1 2026:CGHC:9134 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 490 of 2026 1 - Dukhit Verma S/o Late Sirdari Verma Aged About 59 Years R/o Village- Godhikala Police Chowki Sambalpur, P.S. Nawagadh, District- Bemetara (C.G.). 2 - Rakesh Verma S/o Dukhit Verma Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Godhikala Police Chowki Sambalpur, P.S. Nawagadh, District- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station Nawagadh, District-Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent For appellants : Mr. Tanuj Patwardhan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Akash Agrawal, Panel Lawyer For the objector : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 20.02.2026 1. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants as they are apprehending arrest in Crime No. 325/2025 registered at P.S. Nawagarh, District Bemetara (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 296, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.02.23 11:18:43 +0530 2 2. By impugned order dated 23.01.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Bemetara, the application for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected, which is under challenge in this appeal. 3. As per the prosecution case, complainant Akshay Kumar Ghivre lodged a written complaint on 28.12.2025 stating that on 26.12.2025 the present applicants in collusion with other accused Narayan Verma, Chetan Verma, Jaleshwar Verma, Kuldeep Verma, Puna Ram, Jhamman Rajput, Mukku Rajput, hurled caste based abuses against his brother Surya Dev Ghivre and his niece Tekchand, held them hostages and further beaten and threatened to kill them. On the basis of the said report, offence was registered. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there was resentment between the parties over the JCB work and in this background the incident took place. He further submits that the FIR does not show the specific allegation against the present appellants Dukhit Verma and Rakesh Verma regarding their involvement in offence of assault as they were not holding any stick or rod at the time and place of occurrence and the FIR speaks about assault and abuses caused by other main accused persons who were holding bamboo sticks and rods. He further submits that there was delay in lodging the FIR, for which, no plausible explanation was given. He further submits that on 29.12.2025 the counter report was also filed by the appellants’ party against the complainant-party, however, no FIR was registered against the complainants. He further submits that the offences u/s 115(2), 127(2), 190, 296, 351(3) of BNS are bailable, therefore, the appellants be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel as also learned counsel appearing for the objector opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that named FIR was registered against the appellants and other accused persons alleging that all the accused persons abused the complainant party in the name of cast and assaulted them, due to which, the victims Survya Deo and Tekchand suffered injuries and were admitted in hospital. He further submits that since the FIR discloses the prima-facie allegations of caste based abuses and atrocities, the bar created u/s 18 of the Special Act prohibits the benefit of granting anticipatory bail. 6. The complainant appeared in person before this court and raised objection to granting anticipatory bail. 3 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 8. In the instant case, named FIR was filed which shows the presence of the present appellants and other accused at the place of occurrence on 26.12.2025 and the accused persons abused in the name of caste and assaulted the complainant’s brother Surya Dev and his niece Tekchand. 9. If the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of an offence, specifically alleging caste-based abuses and atrocities under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the bar created under Section 18 and 18A of the Act strictly applies, prohibiting the grant of anticipatory bail. 10. Since the FIR at a glance speaks about the acts committed by these appellants along with other accused, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the appellants, at this stage. 11. Thus having considered the over all facts and circumstances of the case; submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the bar created under the Special Act, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants. 12. Accordingly, this appeal is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao