Allowed

Sushant Chattar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Mar 2022CRA/205/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This special bail appeal challenged the dismissal of a bail application. The High Court reviewed the facts of a sexual offence under SC/ST Act. The judge inclined to allow the appeal due to the specific circumstances and released the appellant on bail. Disposition: Allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellant released on regular bail upon furnishing Rs. 25,000/ with one surety by strict conditions.

Sushant Chattar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Caste Atrocities | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRA No. 205 of 2022

¶5

Sushant Chattar S/o Vipin Chattar Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Ranbhatha, P.S. Pusour District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶6

---- Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pusour District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Appellant : Shri Rishabh Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For State : Shri Gurudev I Sharan, Govt. Advocate

¶11

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

16/03/2022

¶14

This appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is filed challenging the order dated 20.01.2022 passed by learned Special Judge (SC & ST) Act, Raigarh whereby application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail has been dismissed.

¶15

Appellant is arrested in connection with Crime No.214/2021 registered at Police Station-Pusour, District- Raigarh (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v)

¶16

of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

¶17

-2-

¶18

Atrocities) Act.

¶19

Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that the prosecutrix lodged written report before the concerned police station on 25.09.2021 making allegation that on one day, appellant came to her house to call her for the purpose of work in his agricultural field. Finding the prosecutrix alone, applicant committed forceful sexual intercourse with her and has also threatened her not to disclose the incident to any one. On 12.09.2021, when she went to house of the appellant demanding her wages, wife of appellant, his sister and appellant closed the doors of the house and assaulted her. Based on written report, aforementioned crime was registered against the appellant and he was arrested on 28.09.2021.

¶20

Learned counsel for appellant would submit that prosecutrix is a widow lady aged about more than 40 years. As per allegation in FIR, she only made allegation that on one day, appellant came to her house to call her for the purposes of doing labour work in his agricultural field and has committed sexual intercourse at that time. There is no allegation of commission of sexual intercourse thereafter on any occasion. Said allegation has been levelled by the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The allegation of assault by the appellant when she went to demand her wages is also highly improbable. Only to implicate falsely all the family members of the appellant, allegation against sister and wife of appellant is also levelled. He submits that appellant is in jail since 28.09.2021, hence, he may be released on bail.

¶21

-3-

¶22

Learned counsel for State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that the prosecutrix is a illiterate lady and as per allegation, appellant committed forceful sexual intercourse with her on 27.11.2018 which continued till 09.09.2021. He further submits that there is also allegation that when the prosecutrix went to demand the wages, she was assaulted by the appellant and other family members. Hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶23

Prosecutrix is present before this Court through virtual mode through DLSA, Raigarh. She objects to prayer of appellant for grant of bail.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, age of the prosecutrix and further the period of the commission of alleged offence as stated by the prosecutrix to be from 27.11.2018 to 09.09.2021, I am inclined to allow appeal.

¶26

Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Impugned order passed by learned Court below on 20.01.2022 is set aside. It is directed that appellant shall be released on regular bail upon his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:-

¶27

a) Appellant shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶28

-4-

¶29

b) Appellant shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶30

Certified copy as per rules.

¶31

Sd/------/-/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶32

Praveen

Sushant Chattar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushant Chattar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Peeli Bai Vs Director, Mohan Jute Mill p Ltd. and Ors.

Lalit Kumar Sahu Vs Municipal Corporation, Durg and Other

Kumari Bai Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Urmila Dhruw Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Samlal @ Shyamlal and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.