1 2026:CGHC:12683 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 527 of 2026 Sahil Verma S/o Bhushan Verma Aged About 21 Years R/o Baldar Sivani, Shivshankar Chowk, Police Station Kharora, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. At Present R/o Shivam City, Saddu, Police Station Vidhan Sabha, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Vidhan Sabha, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For the petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Singh Rathore, Advocate For the State : Mr. Siddhant Tiwari & Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Panel Lawyers (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 17.03.2026 1. This appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant who has been arrested in Crime No. 603/2025 registered at P.S.Vidhan Sabha, District Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 64, 35(2) of BNS and section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. By the impugned order dated 27.01.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), District Raipur in Special Criminal Case No. No.3/2026 the application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail has been rejected, which has been challenged in this appeal. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.03.18 17:30:21 +0530 2 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is the victim who is a student of 21 years has filed a complaint on 06.12.2025 alleging that the appellant has forcibly established physical relations with her who belonged to scheduled caste without her consent and and further threatened to kill her. On such report, crime was registered and the appellant was arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecutrix is major lady of 21 years, she had voluntarily accompanied the appellant on his motorcycle as a pillion rider and she has not raised any alarm therefore, the offence as projected by the prosecution is not made out against him. He submits that the appellant is in jail since 07.12.2025 ; trial has not commenced and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of trial, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and supports the order of the trial Court. He submits that the applicant threatened the victim and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her and the MLC report supports the prosecution case. The appellant has criminal back ground as earlier he was involved in two criminal cases. 6. The victim along with father has appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and objected to grant bail. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 8. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties; the over all facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial has not yet commenced, I am not inclined to release the appellant on regular bail. Accordingly, this appeal is is rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge R a o