Dismissed¶39

Jaleshwar Verma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC19 Feb 2026CRA/422/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail refused; appeals under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 dismissed; statutory bar under Sections 18 and 18A strictly applied where FIR prima facie alleges caste-based abuses and atrocities; Crime No. 325/2025, P.S. Nawagarh, District Bemetara; offences under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 296, 351(3) BNS and Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act; named FIR dated incident 26.12.2025, complaint 28.12.2025; impugned rejection orders 23.01.2026 by Special Judge (Atrocities), Bemetara; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; appellants Narayan Verma, Chetan Verma, Jaleshwar Verma, Kuldeep Verma, Punaram Verma, Jhamman Verma.

What did the court decide?

None; anticipatory bail refused and both appeals rejected. ¶39

Jaleshwar Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; anticipatory bail refused and both appeals rejected.

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants, who apprehend arrest in Crime No. 325/2025 (P.S. Nawagarh, District Bemetara) for offences under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 296, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, notwithstanding the statutory bar under Sections 18 and 18A of that Act arising from prima facie caste-based atrocities alleged in the FIR. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

If the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of an offence specifically alleging caste-based abuses and atrocities under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the bar created under Sections 18 and 18A of the Act strictly applies, prohibiting the grant of anticipatory bail.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

A named FIR showing the presence of the present appellants and other accused at the place of occurrence on 26.12.2025, holding sticks and rods, abusing in the name of caste and assaulting the complainant's brother and niece, establishes that a prima facie case is made out against the appellants at this stage.

¶10

Key takeaways

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances, the submissions of counsel, and the bar created under the Special Act, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRA Nos. 333 & 422 of 2026 (common order, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal J., 20.02.2026): Appeals under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 challenging rejection (orders dt. 23.01.2026, Special Judge (Atrocities), Bemetara) of anticipatory bail applications in Crime No. 325/2025, P.S. Nawagarh, District Bemetara, involving Sections 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 296, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. Named FIR alleged that on 26.12.2025 the appellants and other accused hurled caste-based abuses against the complainant's brother Surya Dev Ghivre and niece Tekchand, held them hostages, beat and threatened to kill them. Court held that where the FIR prima facie discloses caste-based abuses and atrocities under the SC/ST Act, the bar under Sections 18 and 18A strictly applies and prohibits anticipatory bail; a prima facie case was found against the appellants. Appeals rejected.

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by ALLENA ALLENA ANNAJEE ANNAJEE RAO RAO Date: 2026.02.23 11:19:34 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:9133

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 333 of 2026

¶7

1 - Narayan Verma S/o Ramsharan Verma Aged About 50 Years R/o Vill. Pendri, Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist.- Bemetara (C.G.).

¶8

2 - Chetan Verma S/o Narayan Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Vill. Pendri, Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist.- Bemetara (C.G.) --- Appellants

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara (C.G.) --- Respondent

¶11

For appellants	: Mr.	Satyendra Srivas, Advocate
For the State	: Mr.	Akash Agrawal, Panel Lawyer
For the objector	: Mr.	Hemant Kesharwani,Advocate

¶12

CRA No. 422 of 2026

¶13

1 - Jaleshwar Verma S/o Narayan Verma Aged About 27 Years R/o Vill. Pendri, Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara, C.G.

¶14

¶15

2 - Kuldeep Verma S/o Narayan Verma Aged About 22 Years R/o Vill. Pendri, Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara, C.G.

¶16

3 - Punaram Verma S/o Devcharan Verma Aged About 51 Years R/o Vill. Pendri, Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara, C.G.

¶17

4 - Jhamman Verma S/o Narendra Kumar Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Vill. Jewra (S), Police Chowki- Sambalpur, P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara, C.G. - -- Appellants

¶18

Versus

¶19

State of Chhattisgarh through P.S.- Nawagarh, Dist. Bemetara, C.G. --- Respondent

¶20

For appellants	: Mr.	Satyendra Srivas, Advocate
For the State	: Mr.	Akash Agrawal, Panel Lawyer
For the objector	: Mr.	Aman Upadhyay,Advocate

¶21

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

20.02.2026

¶24

1. These appeals are filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants as they are apprehending arrest in Crime No. 325/2025 registered at P.S. Nawagarh, District Bemetara (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 296, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶25

2. By impugned orders dated 23.01.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Bemetara, the applications for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected, which are under challenge in these appeals. Since both these appeals are relating to same crime number, they are disposed off by this common order.

¶26

3. As per the prosecution case, complainant Akshay Kumar Ghivre lodged a written complaint on 28.12.2025 stating that on 26.12.2025 the

¶27

¶28

present applicants in collusion with other accused hurled caste based abuses against his brother Surya Dev Ghivre and his niece Tekchand, held them hostages and further beaten and threatened to kill them. On the basis of the said report, offence was registered.

¶29

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there was resentment between the parties over the JCB work and in this background the incident took place. He submits that there was delay in lodging the FIR, for which, no plausible explanation was given. He further submits that on 29.12.2025 the counter report was also filed by the appellants’ party against the complainant-party, however, no FIR was registered against the complainants. He further submits that the offences u/s 115(2), 127(2), 190, 296, 351(3) of BNS are bailable, therefore, the appellants be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶30

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel as also learned counsel appearing for the objector opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submit that named FIR was registered against the appellants and other accused persons namely Narayan Verma, Chetan Verma, Jaleshwar Verma, Kuldeep Verma, Puna Ram, Jhamman Rajput, Mukku Rajput, Dukhit and Rakesh. It is alleged that the accused persons abused the complainant party in the name of cast and assaulted them, due to which, the victims Survya Deo and Tekchand suffered injuries and were admitted in hospital. The allegation of assault further stood firm by the medical report. They further submit that since the FIR discloses the prima-facie allegations of caste based abuses and atrocities, the bar created u/s 18 of the Special Act prohibits the benefit of granting anticipatory bail.

¶31

6. The complainant appeared in person before this court and raised objection to granting anticipatory bail.

¶32

7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

¶33

8. In the instant case, named FIR was filed which shows the presence of the present appellants and other accused at the place of occurrence on 26.12.2025 and the accused were holding sticks and rods and abused in the name of caste and assaulted the complainant’s brother Surya Dev and his niece Tekchand.

¶34

9. If the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of an offence,

¶35

¶36

specifically alleging caste-based abuses and atrocities under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the bar created under Section 18 and 18A of the Act strictly applies, prohibiting the grant of anticipatory bail.

¶37

10. Since the FIR at a glance speaks about the acts committed by these appellants along with other accused, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the appellants, at this stage.

¶38

11. Thus having considered the over all facts and circumstances of the case; submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the bar created under the Special Act, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants.

¶39

12. Accordingly, these appeals are rejected .

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶42

Rao

Jaleshwar Verma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaleshwar Verma 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

Shailesh Katre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sagar Khute Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhojram Shriwas @ Rikki Sen @ Vickcky Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Narayan Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Suleman Quraishi Vs State of Chhattisgarh