2025:CGHC:55811 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2374 of 2025 Dayashankar Gupta S/o Late Chhatradhari Sao Aged About 54 Years Cast- Kalwar R/o Dhui, Post And P.S. - Ramkola, Tahsil- Pratappur, Distt- Surajpur C.G.

... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station- Ramkola, Distt- Surajpur C.G.

... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate For State /Respondent : Ms. Binu Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

Order on Board

17/11/2025

1. The instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 01/11/2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Surajpur, District Surajpur, C.G. in Bail Application No.664/2025, whereby the application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected.

2. The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of anticipatory bail as ASHUTOSH MISHRA ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.24 he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.38/2025 registered in Police Station Ramkola, District Surajpur, C.G. for offence punishable under sections 296, 351(2), 127(2) of BNS and Sections 3(1) (R-S) & 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 22/10/2025, the appellant/accused called to the complainant Chandra Pando from the mobile phone and asked where he was, then the complainant said he was at his-in-laws house in Asandih, after this the accused called him to his house, where Tarachand Maravi of the village was already kept with his hand & feet tied and the appellant abused the complainant in filthy language and asked why he has committed theft in his house and also extended threat to kill him by electrocuting him; grabbed his collar; dragged him inside the house, tied both his hands with a rope and paraded him around the entire neighbourhood, as such humiliated the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a report and an FIR was registered against the appellant vide Annexure A/2.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that due to malafide intention the forged and fabricated FIR has been lodged against the present appellant. He would next contend that the appellant has not abused the complainant in the name of his caste, therefore, the offence under the provisions of S.C. & S.T. Act would not be made out. He would lastly contend that under the facts & circumstances of the case the appellant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and stated that there is a prima facie case made out against the appellant under the provisions of the Act, 1989.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

7. Having considered the rival submissions and perused the record, this Court finds that the allegations made in the FIR, on their face, disclose commission of offences punishable under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. At this stage, the Court is required to examine only the prima facie nature of the accusation, and not to conduct a detailed appreciation of evidence.

8. In view of the specific averments in the FIR attributing intentional insult, humiliation and intimidation to the Satnami Samaj, which belongs to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, the ingredients of the offences under the Act cannot be said to be absent. Consequently, the statutory bar contained in Section 18 and Section 18-A of the SC/ST Act, which expressly prohibit the grant of anticipatory bail where a prima facie case under the Act is made out, becomes operative. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held that once the allegations prima facie attract the provisions of the Act, the Court is precluded from exercising jurisdiction for grant of antici