1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCRCA No. 1344 of 2021

Surya Prakash Dehariya S/o Shri Dwarika Dehariya, Aged

About 24 Years, R/o Village and Post- Indouri, Thana-

Pipariya, Tahsil- Kawardha, District- Kabeerdham,

Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police

Station- Pipariya, District- Kabeerdham, Chhattisgarh.

---- Non-applicant

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Applicant

: Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate

For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Roshan Dubey, P.L.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Proceedings through Video Conferencing)

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Order on Board

14.01.2022

1.

The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section

438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as he is

apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 339 of 2021

registered at Police Station Pipariya, District Kabeerdham (C.G.),

for offence punishable under Sections 354, 354(A) of Indian Penal

Code.

2.

Case of prosecution, is that, prosecutrix lodged a written report on

14.09.2021 making allegation that in the evening, at about 5.30

P.M. on 13.09.2021, she went to field area for answering nature’s

call, at that relevant time, applicant came there and with intent to

outrage her modesty, caught hold of her hand asking for sexual

favour. Prosecutrix somehow manage to escape, came to her

house and intimated the facts to her family members. Thereafter,

on the next day, report was lodged.

2

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there was

some dispute earlier to date of incident i.e. with husband of

complainant of keeping building material near house of

complainant only on that count, false allegations have been

levelled. He submits that under the central scheme, now

Government constructed toilet in each of house and therefore,

there is no occasion for the complainant to go out of house to

answer nature’s call. Applicant is student, aged about 24 years,

hence, he may be granted benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

4.

Per contra, learned counsel representing the State opposing

submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, would submit

that specific allegation of outraging modesty has been levelled by

prosecutrix against applicant. In support of his contention, he read

over statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 of

Cr.P.C. She also submits that prosecutrix suffered injury over her

hand. However, upon asking, he submits that statement of

husband and in-laws of prosecutrix is available in the case diary.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case,

nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, I do not find it

to be a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

7.

Accordingly, anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu)

Judge

Yogesh