1 CGHC010283062026 2026:CGHC:38449 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1889 of 2026 Umesh Sahu, S/o Kumar Sahu, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Dhongaitola Police Station - Bhoramdev, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.08.2026 1. The appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside of order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the Special Judge under SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) and for grant of bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.12/2026, registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 and 351(3) of the BNS and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that the victim preferred a written complaint before the Station House Officer, Police Station Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) stating inter-alia RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 that since 2021-22, she has been residing in a rented house at Rajmahal Chowk, Kawardha. She worked as a singer in the Sur Sangam Lokkala Manch, Kawardha, and used to travel to various places for performances. It is alleged that present appellant Umesh Sahu worked as a percussionist (pad player) in the same folk art group. This is how they became acquainted. It is further alleged that after getting to know each other, present appellant asked for her mobile number, and they started talking over the phone. The present appellant told her that he loved her and wanted to marry her. She fell for his trap and entered into a romantic relationship with him. It is alleged that after a span of time, present appellant began pressurizing her to have physical relations with him, and he assured her that they would marry and live together for the rest of their lives, saying there was no harm in it. It is alleged that on 18.03.2022, the present appellant took her to his house at Phulwari Chowk and had made physical relations with her. It is further alleged that following the aforesaid incident, the present appellant repeatedly took her to various places and continued to have physical relationship with her, due to which she became pregnant twice. It is further alleged that the victim/complainant asked him to marry her, he would say that society would not accept a marriage in a pregnant state and he pressured her into taking medicines to undergo abortions both times. It is further alleged that after continuously exploiting her physically and forcing the abortions, present appellant stopped meeting her and flatly refused to marry her. It is further alleged that the victim/complainant approached to the house of present appellant in Village Dhongaitala to talk about marriage, she discovered that he was already a married person. He had kept her in the dark, 3 deceived her with the promise of marriage to establish physical relations and forced her abortions. It is further alleged that on 15.02.2026, present appellant came to her house in Village Khairag and once again, promising to marry her, he had made physical relations with her again. He then threatened her, saying that if she told anyone about their relationship, he would kill her. On the basis of written report dated 29.04.2026, Police registered an offence bearing Crime No. 12/2026 on very same date for the offence punishable under Sections 69 and 351(3) of the BNS and investigation was course of was initiated. 3. During investigation, the victim was sent to hospital for medical examination where the doctor opined that no definite opinion can be given regarding non-consensual sexual contact and advised for FSL, the present appellant was arrested, statement of the victim under Section 183 of BNSS recorded before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, statement of the witnesses were recorded and matter was further being investigated by the police of Police Station - Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District - Kabirdham (C.G.). 4. During the course of investigation, the offences punishable under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was also added, in addition to Sections 69 and 351(3) of the BNS. 5. The appellant preferred an application for grant of regular bail before this Court registered as MCRC No. 4738/2026 and decided on 09.07.2026, whereby the MCRC was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh bail application in accordance with law, thereafter 4 the appellant moved an application before the learned trial Court i.e. learned Special Judge under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) which was decided on 13.07.2026 whereby the application filed for grant of regular bail on behalf of the appellant was dismissed. Hence, this appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the victim is a major girl, aged about 24 years old and she and the appellant were having affair and known to each other since 2021–2022, and a consensual sexual relationship was established between both of them, which goes to show that the victim was a consenting party. The appellant has been in custody since 30.04.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, the appellant prays for grant of bail. 7. Learned State counsel submits that from perusal of the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, it appears that the appellant has established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage in deceitful manner many times, and thereafter, it was came to the knowledge of the victim that the appellant is already a married person. Accordingly, the present appellant is not entitled for grant of bail. 8. The victim/complainant has appeared before this Court in person, and she has objected the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, and she has also endorse the submissions advanced by the learned State 5 counsel. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed thereto. 10. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the appellant, and further considering the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, it is observed that the victim is a major girl, aged about 24 years old and she and the appellant were having affair and known to each other since 2021–2022, and a consensual sexual relationship was established between both of them, which goes to show that the victim was a consenting party. In the present case, the appellant has been in custody since 30.04.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Accordingly, the order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the Special Judge under SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.), in Special Case No. 127/2026, rejecting the appellant’s application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, is hereby set aside. 11. Consequently, this appeal is hereby allowed. 12. Let applicant – Umesh Sahu, involved in Crime No.12/2026, registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, Kawardha, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 69 and 351(3) of the BNS and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with 6 the following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the appellant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 13. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 7 14. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned to necessary information and compliance, forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar