1 2026:CGHC:11652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 523 of 2026 1 - Chitrangad Kumar Sahu S/o Deendayal Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Arjuni, Police Station Gunderdehi, District Balod C.G. ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Arjuni, District Dhamtari C.G. ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Gunja Taram, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/03/2026 1. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 68/2025 registered at police station Arjuni, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 69 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 05.05.2025, a report was lodged by the victim alleging therein that from HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.03.12 10:39:28 +0530 2 01.01.2014 to 30.12.2024, on the pretext of marriage, the appellant committed repeatedly sexual intercourse with her. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present appellant. 3. By order dated 02.02.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge in Special Criminal Case (SC/ST Act) No. 10/2025, the second bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. The first criminal appeal of the appellant was dismissed on merit by this Court on 18.07.2025 in CRA No. 1246/2025. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the Appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. She further submits that the victim is a major unmarried girl, the appellant and the victim remained in a relationship from 01.01.2014 to 30.12.2024, and the relationship which was established between the appellant and the victim is a consensual relationship, which is evident from the statement of the victim. She also submits that at the time of the first criminal appeal, the trial had not commenced, and that, now, of the 13 listed witnesses, 9 have been examined. She lastly submits that the appellant is in jail since 06.05.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to be finalised, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be released on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence available on record against the Appellant. Therefore, at this stage, the Appellant may not be granted bail. 3 7. The victim appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant of bail to the appellant. 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 9. Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that after dismissal of the first criminal appeal on 18.07.2025, the victim was examined before the trial Court on 24.10.2025 and out of 13 listed witnesses, 9 witnesses have been examined. Further, looking to the statement of the victim and considering the fact that the appellant is in jail since 06.05.2025, and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to release the appellant on bail. 10.Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 02.02.2026 passed by the learned Trial Court is set- aside. 11.It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu