1 CGHC010281782026 2026:CGHC:38202 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1812 of 2026 • Akhilesh Mishra @ Justin S/o Arvind Mishra Aged About 29 Years R/o Kirti Nagar Nayapara Sirgitti, Police Station - Sirgitti, Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Judgment on Board 25.08.2026 1. The appellant has filed this criminal appeal under Section 14(A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as he has been arrested on 05.02.2026 in connection with Crime No. 68/2026 registered before the Police Station - Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 332, 69, 296, 115(2) and 351(2) and Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2026.08.25 18:38:54 +0530 2 2. In pursuance of direction given by this Court, victim has appeared before this Court through concerned DLSA and has raised no objection in releasing the appellant on bail. Her submission is taken on record. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the victim has lodged an FIR before the Police Station - Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) alleging that the victim is aged about 29 years and there was a love affair with the appellant and he has made physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. When the victim insisted for soleminzation of marriage, the appellant started assaulting her, which has compelled the victim to lodge the FIR against the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the victim was examined before the Court wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution. He would further submit that the victim in paragraph 8 of her evidence has stated that the accused/appellant has not done anything against the will of the victim. Thus, he would submit that the victim is a consenting party in commission of the offence and would pray for enlarging the appellant on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and would submit that the appellant is aware that the victim belongs to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, still he has made physical relationship with the victim knowing that no marriage can be solemnized between them, thus from very inception the appellant intends not to marry her. Therefore, he would pray for rejection of bail application. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the diary with utmost circumspection. 7. Considering the fact that the victim herself has denied in paragraph 7 of the evidence that the appellant has made physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage, in fact the physical relationship was developed with their love and affection and with the consent of the victim, the appellant is in jail since 05.02.2026 i.e about 6 months and 20 days and also considering the fact that conclusion of the trial may take some time, I am inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of bail to the appellant, is allowed. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court. He shall appear before the trial court on each and every date given by the said trial court, till disposal of the trial. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Manish