Vishal Dwivedi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

			... Respondent
For Appellant	:	Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Sr. Ad Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate	v. Along with
For State	:	Mr. Pranjal Shukla, PL
For Complainant	:	Mr. R.N. Sahu, Advocate

¶11

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

03/02/2025

¶14

The instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 29/11/2024 passed in Special Sessions (Atrocities) Case No.38/2024 by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. whereby the application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. of the appellant has been rejected.

¶15

The appellant has preferred this appeal for grant of regular bail as he is

¶16

ASHUTOSH Digitally signedby ASHUTOSHMISHRA MISHRA Date:2025.02.0410:57:46 +0530

¶17

2 / 5

¶18

arrested in connection with Crime No.586/2024 registered in Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja, (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 376(2)(<+), 294 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 3(2) (v), 3 (1) (w-ii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

¶19

The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 02.09.2024 the prosecutrix made written complaint against the present appellant alleging that in the month of April 2022 while she was working as Sales Girl in Ravi Marketing at Ambikapur, the present appellant was also working as computer operator in the same shop due to which they were known to each other and they were having friendship relationship therefore they were regularly chatting through their mobile phones. On 16.04.2024 present appellant told her that today he has organized his birthday party and invited her at his room in the evening to attend his birthday party. At about 9 PM the present appellant took the prosecutrix along with him on on his motorcycle and came to his room. But when she reached to the room there was no celebration of birthday party therefore the prosecutrix told him that he has committed fraud with her but the present appellant forcefully committed rape with her in his room. After 7 to 8 days the appellant again told the prosecutrix that if she will come to his room then he will give surprise but the prosecutrix refused to come at his room then the appellant threatened her that he has made video while he was committing rape with her and if she will not come then he will viral those video on the social media. On such threatening being extended by the appellant, the prosecutrix at about 9 PM came to the room of the

¶20

3 / 5

¶21

appellant and again the appellant committed rape on the pretext of marriage. Thereafter, the appellant refused to perform marriage then the prosecutrix has made complaint against the present appellant. The Police of Police Station Ambikapur lodged First Information Report and the appellant was arrested.

¶22

Learned senior counsel for the appellant would contend that as per the statement of the prosecutrix on 16.04.2024 the appellant committed rape whereas the First Information Report has been lodged on 03.09.2024 which is about after five months, therefore the complaint which has been made by the prosecutrix is after thought only to falsely implicate the present appellant. He would next contend that the prosecutrix and the present appellant were having love relationship with each other and the age of prosecutrix is 25 years and she was having love with the present appellant therefore she was the consenting party at the time of incident. He would next contend that there is no evidence in the charge-sheet which has been submitted by the police after investigation that the present appellant made obscene video clipping of prosecutrix. He would next contend that the present appellant is aged about 21 years young boy and the prosecutrix is 25 years old lady but only to blackmail the present appellant the prosecutrix has falsely made compliant against him, therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer for grant of bail.

¶24

The prosecutrix appeared before this Court and recorded her objection

¶25

4 / 5

¶26

with regard to grant of bail to the appellant.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

¶28

Perusal of the record prima facie would show that there was love relation between the prosecutrix and the appellant and on a specific question being raised from the State counsel that whether any video of the prosecutrix was found in the mobile of the appellant, learned State counsel stated that there is no obscene video of the prosecutrix in the mobile of the appellant. Therefore, looking to the facts & circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the appellant on bail.

¶29

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set-aside.

¶30

Let appellant Vishal Dwivedi, involved in Crime No.586/2024 registered in Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja, (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 376(2)(<+), 294 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 3(2) (v), 3 (1) (w-ii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety each in like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶31

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶32

(ii) the appellant shall remain present before the trial Court on

¶33

5 / 5

¶34

each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

¶35

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS, 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

¶36

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS 2023. If in the opinion of the trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶37

Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court

¶38

concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

(Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE

¶41

ashu

Vishal Dwivedi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Dwivedi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunita Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kesharibai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sonkumar Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.Neeta Singh Vs Laxminarayan and Ors.

Rajiv Rai @ Raju Vs State of Chhattisgarh