Prakash Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 366 Chatt

                                          1




                                                                             NAFR
                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                       Proceedings through Video Conferencing
                             Criminal Appeal No. 1561 of 2021
      Prakash Sahu aged 33 years S/o Shri Devram Sahu, R/o Village -
       Nawapara Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                                     ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
      State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Station House Officer, Police Station -
       Bodala, District Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                            ----State/Respondent

For Appellant : Shri Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent /State : Shri Adil Minhaz, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya, J Judgment on Board 21.01.2022

1. This appeal by the accused/appellant under Section 14-A of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is directed

against the order dated 31.05.2021 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities

Act), Kabirdham (C.G.) in Special Case No. 395/2021, rejecting his regular

bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The appellant is in jail since 12.05.2021 in

connection with Crime No. 97/2021 for the offence punishable under

Sections 363, 366, 305/34 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered at

Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.).

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has filed application dated

19.01.2022 for taking on record the documents i.e. certified copy of evidence

of PW-1 Sushikala, PW-2 Faguram, PW-3 Raju, PW-4 Ramratan and PW-8

Singhram.

3. On due consideration, the aforesaid application is allowed and the

documents are taken on record.

4. Earlier appeal of the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated

31.08.2021 passed in Cr.A. No. 583/2021. However, liberty was granted in

favour of the appellant to file a fresh appeal as and when occasion arises.

5. As per prosecution case, on the pretext of marriage, present appellant

Prakash Sahu alongwith co-accused Narad Sahu took the deceased (minor

girl - daughter of complainant) and drop her at Village Chitarhin Kokda Khar.

It is alleged that the deceased committed suicide by hanging on 03.05.2021

due to affair between her and appellant. It is further alleged that the

complainant asked appellant Prakash Sahu about reasons behind the

commission of suicide by his daughter, then he (complainant) was informed

by appellant Prakash Sahu that he (Prakash Sahu) refused to marry her

daughter. It is further alleged that the appellant and co-accused were having

knowledge that the deceased was minor girl belongs to the scheduled tribe

community. Hence, on report being lodged to the above effect, the aforesaid

offences have been registered against the appellant and co-accused.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per evidence of PW-1,

PW-2, PW-3, PW-4 & PW-8, they have not supported the prosecution case.

He submits that the appellant is in jail since 12.05.2021 and conclusion of

the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the appellant may be released

on bail.

7. Learned counsel for the State opposing the appeal submits that the case

dairy/records is not available with him and prays for time.

8. Father of the prosecutrix namely Singhram S/o Sukhlal alongwith his

counsel Shri J.P. Sahu is connected through video conferencing from District

Legal Services Authority, Kawardha and he was identified by an employee of

DLSA, Kawardha. Father of the prosecutrix stated that he has no objection

to grant of bail to the appellant by this Court.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the

evidence of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 & PW-4, particularly considering the

evidence of PW-8 Singhram (father of the prosecutrix), no specific allegation

has been made against the present appellant, PW-8 has no objection to

grant of bail to the appellant by this Court, the detention period of the

appellant who is 33 years old, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some

time, and the fact that there is no apprehension of the appellant tampering

with the evidence or absconding as admitted by learned counsel for the

appellant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this

Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case for grant of bail to the

appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

11. It is directed that in the event of appellant executing a personal bond for a

sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.1,00.000/- each to the

satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the

following conditions:-

i. he 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. ii. he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

iii. he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. iv. he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.

12.Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned Police Station

forthwith who shall inform the trial Court in the event of appellant involving

himself in similar nature of offence.

Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge vatti