CGHC010303812026 2026:CGHC:39303 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2016 of 2026 1 - Urmila Yadav W/o Suresh Yadav, Aged About 43 Years (D O B 13- 05-1983), R/o Ward No. 12, Budhwari Bazar, Rawabhatha, P. S. Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) ----Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Appellant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Govt. Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 08.09.2026 1. This appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short Special Act) is arising out of an order dated 25.07.2026 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), District - Raipur (C.G.) in B.A. No. 2166 of 2026 by which the learned Special Judge has dismissed the application of the appellant under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. Appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 602/2026, registered at Police Station – Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) for an alleged offence punishable under Section 296, 351(2) KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2026.09.08 16:56:35 +0530 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Special Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.07.2026 the complainant submitted at written complaint alleging that the appellant and her son on 01.07.2026 at between 9:00 PM to 10:30 pm used filthy language and used words against caste of the complaint. It was further alleged that the incident took place in front other witness. On the basis of said complaint, the aforesaid offence was registered against the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent and she has not committed the aforesaid crime and has been falsely implicated in the case. He would further submit that on 15.04.2026, it is the appellant who has filed complaint against the present complainant for the misconduct done by the complainant and causing injury to her son, the complainant is a habitual offender and in revenge he has falsely implicated them, therefore, she may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail. He would further submit that the coaccused son of the appellant has already been granted regular bail by the learned trial Court, therefore, the appellant being lady, he would pray for releasing her on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and would submit that the appellant has used caste based words against the complainant which has been witnessed by the public, as such, there is prima facie material against the appellant, therefore, the appellant is not entitled to get benefit of anticipatory bail, and the order passed by the trial Court is legal, justified which does not warrant any interference by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of allegations, perusal of FIR and the submissions of the respective parties, and considering the fact that the son of the appellant has already been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court and looking to the fact that it prima facie reflects counter complaint registered by the complainant, also there is complaint against the complainant with regard to his conduct, this court is inclined to allow the appeal of the appellant. The impugned order dated 25.07.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, is hereby set aside. The appeal is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/arresting officer. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge deshmukh