Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CG) 211
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Parth Prateem Sahu, J
Md. Imtiyaj S/o Siraj – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 512 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Pushkar Sinha
For the Respondents: Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani
The court upheld the dismissal of bail under the SC/ST Act, finding no error in the lower court's decision despite claims of improper accusation.
Headnote:The appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenging the rejection of bail application by the Special Judge. The appellant claims the allegations are against a co-accused, asserting that Section 18 does not apply. The court finds no error in the lower court's decision, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations. The core issue is whether the bail application was improperly denied based on the claims presented. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed but allows the opportunity for a future bail application upon surrender.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. potential misapplication of sc/st act in bail proceedings. (Para 1 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. specific allegations against co-accused and their implications. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. assessment of the court on allegations and decision rationale. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. finality of the appeal decision and opportunity for future application. (Para 8) |
ON BOARD (03 / 04 /202
4)
1. Appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Act of 1989”) for grant of regular bail, being aggrieved by the order passed by learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Baikunthpur, District Koriya, C.G. rejecting the bail application filed under Section 438 of CrPC on 14.02.2024, as he apprehends his arrest in connection with crime no. 13/2024 registered at Police Station Charcha District Koriya for offences under Sections 294, 506, 386/34 of IPC, Section 4 of Protection of Debtors Act and Section 3(1) (r) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Act of 1989”).
2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim appeared before this Court through virtual mode from DLSA, Koriya, he submitted that he is having no objection in grant of bail to appellant.
3. Case of prosecution in brief is that victim lodged a written report in the concerned police station alleging that the co-accused Raju Khan has withdrawn money as loan amount, however, he was paid only ₹ 20,000/- and rest of the amount was kept by them. It is further allegation that on different dates different loan was obtained and total sum as loan to the tune of ₹ 38,90,000/- was withdrawn in the name of appellant. When the complainant was not going on duty, he was being abused and threatened by the appellant and the co-accused Raju Khan. Based upon which, aforementioned crime was registered.
4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the entire allegation of withdrawing money is against co-accused Raju Khan and not against the applicant and hence the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act would not be applicable in the facts of the case.
5. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant and would submit that in the written report there is allegation of abusing and giving threat of life to the complainant/ victim. He readover the contents of written report.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the respective parties , in particular the contents of complain and the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, I do not find any error in the impugned order passed by learned Special Court (Atrocity Act) rejecting the application under Section 438 of CrPC.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. However, on applicant’s surrender before the concerned court and filing of application for grant of regular bail, the concerned court may consider the same, if possible on the same day, in accordance with law.
