Anand Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 892 Chatt

                                                                    NAFR
              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                CRA No. 2037 of 2022
        Anand Gupta S/o Shivchand Gupta Aged About 33 Years R/o
         Village Kapildevpur, Police Station Chalgali, District Balrampur-
         Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh
                                                              ---- Appellant
                                  Versus
        State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
         Station A.J.A.K. Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh Civil
         And Revenue District Ambikapur, District Surguja
                                                          ---- Respondent

For the Appellant/s :- Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Adv.

For the State :- Mr. Adil Minhaj, GA _______________________________________________________________

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput,

Order on Board 10.02.2023

The appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter referred to

as "Special Act") has been filed against the order dated 02.12.2022

passed by Learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Surguja (Ambikapur),

CG rejecting the application u/s 439 Cr.PC in connection with the Crime

No. 10/2022 registered at Police Station Ajak, Ambikapur, District

Surguja, CG for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 313,

323 of IPC and Sections 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant committed

sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on several occasion on false

pretext of marriage thereby committed the said offence.

3. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent

and has been implicated in a false case. He submits that the appellant

and the prosecutrix where in relationship from 27.01.2019 to

25.10.2021 thereafter he submits that on the last date of relationship

the appellant was admitted in the Ramakrishna Care Hospital and was

undergoing treatment for kidney ailment and also undergone kidney

transplantation. On 06.02.2023 the State was directed to verify with

regard to medical records appended with the bail application. After due

verification Mr. Minhaj submits that the appellant has undergone

treatment and he has verified the medical documents. He further

submits that the case is not of false assurance of marriage, rather

allegedly based on relationship of more than three years. He ..and

appellant is in jail since 28.11.2022 and no custodial interrogation is

necessary, the trial is likely to take sometime therefore, appellant may

be enlarged on bail. In order to buttress his submissions he placed

reliance on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of

Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2020) 10 SCC

108 and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and

another reported in (2019) 9 SCC 608.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits

that the allegations are serious against the present appellant and on

false pretext of marriage the prosecutrix was subjected to intercourse

by the appellant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. On 30.01.2023 prosecutrix voluntary appeared in Camera

Proceeding and submitted that earlier, she raised 'Serious Objection'

with regard to grant of bail to the appellant from the concerned DLSA,

however, on 30.01.2023 she submitted that she has 'No Objection' for

grant of bail to the appellant.

6. After hearing counsel for the parties, considering the facts and

circumstances of the case, considering the nature of allegation;

detention period; period of relationship between the appellant and the

prosecutrix; medical conditions of the appellant; trial is likely to take

sometime, I am inclined to allow the appeal of the appellant.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order set

aside and it is directed that on appellant shall be released on bail on

furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent

surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court

on the condition that :-

a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and

every date, unless exempted from appearance.

b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution

witnesses.

8. The observations made hereinabove is only for the purpose of

deciding the bail application and the trial will decide the case on its own

merit without being influenced by any observation made hereinabove.

All the pending application are disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge PAWAN