1 2026:CGHC:20033 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 851 of 2026 1 - Umend Kumar Nishad S/o Late Shri Budhram Nishad Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Mohera, Police Station - Magarload, District - Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 2 - Shiv Narayan Nishad S/o Late Shri Budhram Nishad Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Mohera, Police Station - Magarload, District - Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 3 - Genduram Nishad S/o Late Shri Budhram Nishad Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Mohera, Police Station - Magarload, District - Dhamtari Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ajak Magarload, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 29/04/2026 1. Pursuant to the order dated 01.04.2026, the complainant along with her son appeared through virtual mode from DLSA, Dhamtari Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2026.04.30 20:36:21 +0530 2 and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. Their objection is taken on record. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, 'the SC/ST Act') against the impugned order dated 10.03.2026 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act) Dhamtari, in Special Criminal Case (SC/ST Act) No. 16 of 2025, whereby the second bail application of the appellants have been rejected. 3. This is the second round of bail application filed by the appellant, the first bail application in the form of criminal appeal has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 passed in CRA No. 1902 of 2025. The appellants are claiming regular bail who have been arrested on 23.07.2025 in connection with crime No. 60/2025 registered at Police Station AJAK Magarlod, District Dhamtari for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 117(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023,and Section 3(1)(द), 3(2)(v)(क) of the SC/ST Act. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.04.2025, when the present appellants were beating son of appellant-1 Umend Kumar Nishad, victim intervened them and asked not to beat the minor boy. On this issue, at about 12 in the noon, when the victim was returning to his house from the fields, on his way, appellants assaulted him by hands, fists, stone, and lathi, by which the victim 3 received grievous injuries including fracture of fronto temporal bone of head and mandible bone. Matter was reported to the Police, victim has been taken to the hospital, the appellants were arrested, and charge-sheet has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that charges under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 117(2), and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, as well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act, have been framed. He would submit that all the offences under the BNS are bailable, however, in view of the provisions of the SC/ST Act, which are non-bailable offences, the applicants are in jail. The applicants have been in jail since 23.07.2025 and have thereby already remained in custody for about nine months, and out of twelve cited witnesses, five witnesses, including the complainant and the injured, have been examined. The complainant party was engaged in selling illegal contraband (ganja). The present applicants have made a complaint to the police. Considering the nature of the offence and the period of detention of the appellants, although their first bail application was dismissed on merits, they may be released by allowing their second bail application, which has been filed in the form of a criminal appeal. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes. 4 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, and the material available in the charge-sheet against the appellants, and further considering that the offences under the BNS are bailable offences, and that only the offence under the SC/ST Act is non-bailable, and also considering that the complainant and the injured have already been examined before the learned trial Court, and further that the appellants are in jail since 23.07.2025 and have no criminal antecedents, I am inclined to release the appellants on bail in view of the fact that the offences under the BNS are bailable offences. 8. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.03.2026, passed by Learned trial Court, in Special Case (SC/ST Act) No. 16 of 2025 is set aside. The appellants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. the appellants shall also abide by the following conditions:- (i) The appellants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. 5 (ii) The appellant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) The appellants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial unless their personal presence is exempted by the trial Court. 9. It is made clear that any observation made in this order is restricted only for consideration of the present appeal. The learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made in this order. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok