Yadunandan Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 237 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Yadunandan Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 March, 2026

                                                            1




                                                                                          NAFR
          Digitally


                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
          signed by
          SOURABH
SOURABH   PATEL
PATEL     Date:
          2026.03.09
          17:17:37
          +0530


                                                CRA No. 621 of 2026

                       1 - Yadunandan Rajput S/o Rohit Rajput, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
                       Village Tribhuwanpur, P.S. And Tehsil Sargaon, Distt. Mungeli, C.G.,
                       At Present R/o Village Khaira, P.S. And Tahsil Nandghat, Distt.
                       Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                  ... Appellant
                                                         versus

                       1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S.
                       Nandghat, Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                ... Respondent

For Appellant : Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Bharat Rajput, Adv.

For Respondent/State : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 09.03.2026

1. This appeal under Section 14-A(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short

"the SC/ST Act") has been preferred by the appellant against

the order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the Special Judge, SC &

ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Bemetara (C.G.), whereby the

anticipatory bail application filed by the appellant under Section

482 of BNSS in connection with Crime No. 14/2026 registered

at Police Station Nandghat, District-Bemetara (C.G.) for

commission of offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3),

115(2), 117(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(s) of SC & ST

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has already been arrested, therefore, the present appeal has become infructuous.

3. In view of submission made by learned counsel for the

appellant, the present appeal is dismissed as having become

infructuous. Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.