Allowed

Rohit Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC22 Apr 2024CRA/696/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail appeal in a rape and SC/ST Atrocities Act case. The victim had turned hostile at trial and stated before this Court she had no objection to bail. The Court enlarged the applicant on bail with conditions, setting aside the rejection order.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on regular bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety, subject to trial appearance and non-tampering conditions.

Rohit Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Caste Atrocities | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRA No.696 of 2024

¶5

Rohit Kumar Patel S/o Hemlal Patel Aged About 34 Years Caste Aghariya R/o. Village Naurangpur, Tehsil Sarangarh, District : Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Sarangarh, District : Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. K.K. Behrani, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶12

23.4.2024

¶13

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth 'the Act of 1989') has been preferred against the order dated 13.3.2024 by which learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Raigarh rejected application of applicant for grant of regular bail to him in connection with Crime No.27/2024 registered at Police Station Sarangarh, District Raigarh (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376, 323 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sections 3 (2) (v) of the Scheuled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act of 1989’)

¶14

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that victim lodged report

¶15

¶16

in concerned police station alleging that on 25.12.2023 at 02:00 p.m. in the afternoon the battery of her mobile got discharged, therefore, she went to Balaji Crusher Kharri where she had earlier worked and when she was talking to the Cook, applicant, who was also working in Balaji Crusher, came there and gave two slaps to her. Therafter, when she was returning back to her home, appellant followed her and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. He assaulted her also as a result she became unconscious. Based on this report, aforementioned crime was registered against applicant and he was arrested on 12.1.2024.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that absolutely false and frivolous allegation of committing forcible sexual intercourse is levelled against applicant. He submits that a quarrel took place between them in which applicant only slapped the victim. He submits that now the victim has been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 12.1.2024, charge sheet has already been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take time, hence, applicant may be enlarged on regular bail.

¶18

On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed submissions of learned counsel for appellant and referring to statements of victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 CrPC, would submit that there are serious allegation against

¶19

¶20

the applicant. He further submits that submission of learned cousnel for applicant based on deposition of victim is subject matter of appreciation by trial Court.

¶21

Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, victim is present before this Court through virtual mode from DLSA, Sarangarh and she submits that she is having no objection in grant of bail to applicant.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents filed along with appeal.

¶23

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for applicant based on deposition of victim, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on regular bail.

¶24

Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed, order dated 13.3.2024 passed by the Court below is set aside and it is directed that applicant shall be released on regular bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that;

¶25

he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance.

¶26

he shall not, in any manner, tamper with prosecution witnesses.

¶27

If applicant is found involved in similar offence in

¶28

¶29

future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶30

Certified copy as per rules.

¶31

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶32

roshan/-

Rohit Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar Patel 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

Xyz (Juvenile Balak) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Monu Kumar @ Shuklu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Kumar Kaiwart Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahendra Jangde Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganesh Mrichande Vs Smt. Nileshwari Mrichande

Bindeshwar Agariya Vs State of Chhattisgarh