1 CGHC010205422026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1341 of 2026 Mohhammad Sheikh Arsalan S/o Mohammad Sheikh Afroj, Aged About 23 Years R/o Subhash Chowk Keshkaal, Police Station And Tahsil Keshkaal, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Keshkaal, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Shri Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, P.L. For complainant/objector : Shri Kulesh Sahu, Advocate. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 20/07/2026 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 bail to appellant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 59/2026 registered at Police Station – Keshkaal, District Kondagaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 64(1), 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyay Samhita, 2023 and Section 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 31.03.2026 at about 08:30 pm, the appellant is alleged to have committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix/complainant/victim and after that, the appellant has Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.07.20 16:51:45 +0530 2 threatened her not to disclose the incident. Based upon the report, offence under the above sections has been registered against the present appellant. 3. By order dated 28.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant/accused is a 23 years of young boy and has falsely been implicated by the complainant/victim. He further submits that the victim has not raised any objection for grant of bail to the appellant. He further submits that medical evidence has not supported the case of prosecution and that, no D.N.A. test has been conducted by the prosecution. He also submits that the learned trial Court has rejected the bail application only on the ground that the charge sheet has not been filed. He further submits that now charge-sheet has been filed on 18.05.2026 wherein no charges have been framed and that, the appellant has no previous criminal antecedents. He next submits that the appellant is in jail since 01.04.2026 and that, conclusion of trial may take some considerable time. On these premises, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be granted bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the appeal for grant of bail and submits that the appellant has committed the offence and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the appellant, therefore, the appellant may not be enlarged on bail and the appeal may be rejected. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant/victim/prosecutrix submits that the prosecutrix has not raised any objection to grant bail to the appellant. 3 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record and considering the gravity of the offence, this Court does not find fit it appropriate to grant bail to the appellant/accused. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani