Dismissed¶38

Banvari Singh v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Feb 2025MCRC/34/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MCRC No. 143 of 2025 & MCRC No. 34 of 2025 | Kushal Singh Parihar, Ashok Kushwaha, Ravendra Kushwaha & Banvari Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh | High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur | Regular bail u/S. 483 Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita | Crime No. 228/2024, P.S. Janakpur, Distt. M.C.B.(CG) | Ss. 70(2), 49, 351(2) BNS; Ss. 6 & 17 POCSO Act | Common intention/jointness in rape found established | Bail applications rejected | Arvind Kumar Verma, J. | Order dated 18.02.2025 (reserved 10.02.2025).

What did the court decide?

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the gravity of the offence, the role assigned to the applicants and the statement of the victim, the Court found no good ground to release the applicants on bail and rejected both bail applications. ¶36

Banvari Singh Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

AFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ORDER RESERVED ON 10.02.2025 ORDER DELIVERED ON 18.02.2025

¶4

MCRC No. 143 of 2025

¶5

1 - Kushal Singh Parihar S/o Late Rajkaran Singh Parihar Aged About 51 Years, R/o Janakpur, Adarsh Colony, Thana Janakpur, Distt. M.C.B (C.G.)

¶6

2 - Ashok Kushwaha S/o Late Shravan Kumar Singh Aged About 55 Years R/o Bharatpur (Pitpariha), Thana Janakpur, Distt. M.C.B (C.G.)

¶7

3 - Ravendra Kushwaha S/o Mahesh Prasad Aged About 45 Years R/o Purana Bus Stand, Janakpur, Thana Janakpur, Distt. M.C.B (CG)

¶8

--- Applicants

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Janakpur, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Cg

¶11

--- Respondent(s)

¶12

MCRC No. 34 of 2025

¶13

1 - Banvari Singh S/o Late Atibal Singh Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Janakpur, Thana Janakpur, Tahsil Bharatpur, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G.

--- Applicant

Versus

1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Janakpur, Distt. Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, C.G.

¶18

--- Respondent(s)

¶19

For Applicants : Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL

¶20

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶21

CAV ORDER

¶22

As both these M.Cr.Cs. are arising out of the same Crime Number, they are being disposed of by this common order.

¶23

The applicants have filed these bail applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 228/2024 registered at police station Janakpur, District M.C.B.(CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 70(2), 49 and 351 (2) of BNS and Section 6 & 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶24

Prosecution case in brief is that report was lodged by the mother of the victim at police station Janakpur alleging that on 15.11.2024, the present applicant along with three other accused persons who are teachers had taken the prosecutrix in the car to the house of one of the accused namely Kushal Singh Parihar and committed gang rape and threatened her for dire consequences. Thereafter, again on 22.11.2024, when the victim was going to purchase some household articles, accused Kushal came in the motorcycle and took her to a rented room of the forest police in the name of giving information with relation to the exams. It is alleged that she was not initially willing to go along with the accused. On the basis of the report, the police registered the offence against the accused persons and they were arrested.

¶25

¶26

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case alleging them to be the main accused. He further contended that on the basis of suspicion, the applicants have been involved. He submits that the ingredients of the section had not been fulfilled in the matter and there is no iota of evidence by which it can be established that the applicants have committed the crime. He submits that there was not intention or motive on behalf of the applicants to commit the crime. He submits that there was a long delay in lodging the FIR, the applicants are middle aged persons of 45, 51,54 and 55 years respectively and that the applicant in M.Cr.C. No. 34/2025 is a Deputy Ranger and due to some political rivalry the applicants have been involved in the crime in question. Lastly, it is contended that the charge sheet has been filed, they are in jail since 26.11.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time, they are ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon them and thus, it is submitted that the applications be allowed and the applicants be released on bail.

¶27

Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail applications and submits that for the first time the incident occurred on November 15, 2024 but out of fear, she did not disclose it to anyone. Second time again, she was raped on November 22.11.2024 as she was allured by the applicant stating that he will provide the information with regard to the exam papers and took her in his motorcycle. It is learnt that these incidents occurred at different premises. The accused persons are teachers at a government higher

¶28

¶29

secondary school and Ravendra Singh Kushwaha, is the headmaster of a Government primary school, Devgarh.

¶30

Victim and her parents appeared through the concerned DLSA and have raised no objection.

¶31

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶32

On due consideration of the rival submissions and further considering the involvement of the applicants in the present case and considering the fact that it is very unfortunate that there is a high increase in the rape instances and ravenous maniacs are not even sparing girls of a very tender age and in the present case, the parents of the victim as well as the victim herself have stated that they don’t have any objection if the applicants are released on bail. It might be because the parents could have come under immense pressure from the applicants. It is unfortunate that while dealing with such a sensitive case of rape of a student by her teachers by taking her to a secluded place and satisfied their lust by threatening her with dire consequences if she resisted. The survivor at the tender age of her life was subjected to beastly attack by accused who satisfied their lust in a shame.

¶33

9 . As a member of the noble teaching profession, a teacher should always be willing, self-disciplined, dedicated with integrity to remain ever a learner of knowledge, intelligently to articulate and communicate and imbibe in his students, as duty towards society, to impart education, to bring them up with discipline, inculcate to abjure violence and to develop scientific temper with a spirit of enquiry and reform constantly to rise to higher levels in any walk of life nurturing

¶34

¶35

constitutional ideals enshrined in Article 51-A so as to make the students responsible citizens of the country. Thus the teacher either individually or collectively as a community of teachers, should regenerate this dedication with a bent of spiritualism in broader perspective of the constitutionalism with secular ideologies enshrined in the Constitution as an arm of the State to establish egalitarian social order under the rule of law. The education that is imparted by the teacher determines the level of the student for the development, prosperity and welfare of the society. The quality, competence and character of the teacher are, therefore, most significant to mould the calibre, character and capacity of the student. The fallen standard of the applicants is the tip of the iceberg in the discipline of teaching, a noble and learned profession; it is for each teacher and collectively their body to stem the rot to sustain the faith of the society reposed in them. Needless to say "school is a temple of learning" and the age of the pupil and the nature of the activity in which he takes part are material factors determining the degree and supervision demanded by a teacher. Thus, the above acts itself demonstrate the mental perversion and inconceivable brutality of the applicants. In this case, the sharing of common intention and the jointness in commission of rape is established by the presence of all the accused persons in the offence.

¶36

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, the gravity of offence, role assigned to the applicants, statement of the victim, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail

¶37

¶38

and therefore, the present applications deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, their bail applications are rejected

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

Judge

Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date:2025.02.18 14:51:50 +0530