Rajesh Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC28 Jan 2026CRA/84/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, CRA No. 84 of 2026, Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, 29/01/2026 — second bail appeal under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act allowed; offences under Sections 331(2), 74 BNS and Sections 3(1)(da), 3(1)(v) SC/ST Act, crime no. 227/2024, P.S. Bhakara, Dhamtari; bail granted on personal bond Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety; earlier rejection dated 09.12.2025 in S.C. Case No.09/2025 set aside; earlier appeal CRA No.953/2025 dismissed 26.06.2025.

What did the court decide?

Appellant to be released on regular bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court; impugned order dated 09.12.2025 set aside. ¶¶29

Rajesh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, arrested in crime no. 227/2024 for offences under Sections 331(2) and 74 of BNS and Sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, should be released on regular bail in this second appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the said Act.

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

Considering the circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, statement of the victim, change of circumstances, detention period of the appellant and the fact that the appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, without commenting on merits, the Court held it appropriate to release the appellant on bail.

¶¶28

Key takeaways

The appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the Trial Court is set aside.ratio¶¶29
The appellant is directed to be released on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Second successive appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Appellant arrested in crime no. 227/2024, P.S. Bhakara, District Dhamtari, for offences under Sections 331(2) and 74 of BNS and Sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(v) of the SC/ST Act — First appeal dismissed on merits on 26.06.2025 in CRA No.953/2025 — Second bail application rejected by Special Judge (atrocities), Dhamtari on 09.12.2025 — Appellant contended victim examined but did not support prosecution and trial likely to take time (2 of 11 witnesses examined) — Considering change of circumstances, detention period and likelihood of delay, and without commenting on merits, bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety; impugned order set aside.

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHUBHAM SINGH SINGH RAGHUVANSHI RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.01.30 14:13:36 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:5001

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRA No. 84 of 2026

¶7

Rajesh Kumar Sahu S/o Late Punuram Sahu (Wrongly Mentioned As Punaram In The Order Dated 26-06-2025) Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Borjhara Bazar Para (Mentioned Only As Borjhara In The Order Dated 26-06-2025), Police Station- Bhakara, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station Hosue Officer, P.S. Bhakara, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

(Cause-title is taken from CIS)

¶13

For Appellant : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Bahrani, P.L.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

29/01/2026

¶17

The appellant has filed this appeal for the second time under Section 14-A (2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime number 227/2024 registered at police station Bhakara, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 331 (2), 74 of BNS and offence under

¶18

¶19

Sections 3 (1)(द) & 3 (1)(v) of SCST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

¶20

Vide order dated 26.06.2025 passed in CRA No.953/2025 the appeal which was filed by the appellant for the first time has been dismissed on merits by this Court.

¶21

As per case of the prosecution, the complainant and victim are neighbors. The complainant lodged the report to the effect that on 22.12.2024 after having dinner, she went to sleep in her house with grand-parents, brother and other family members. At around 1:00 AM, she was going to bathroom in the countryyard and on the way near kitchen room, the appellant was hiding and caught hold of her and tried to outrage her modesty. When she raised alarm, her family members rushed there and the appellant fled away by jumping the wall. Based on above, offence was registered against the Appellant.

¶22

By order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (atrocities) Dhamtari in Special Criminal Case No.09/2025, the second bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected against which the appellant has filed this appeal.

¶23

Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the victim and her grandmother has already been examined and the victim has not supported the case of prosecution. He further submit that there is nothing to suggest that the offence was committed by the appellant only on the ground that the prosecutrix belongs to Schedule Caste. He lastly submits that the appellant is in jail since 15.04.2025, out of 11 prosecution witnesses, only two have been examined till date and the case is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be released on bail.

¶24

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient

¶25

¶26

evidence available on record against the Appellant, therefore, the Appellant may not be granted benefit bail.

¶27

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

¶28

Considering the circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, statement of the victim, change of circumstances, detention period of the appellant and the fact that the appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting on merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to release the appellant on bail.

¶29

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the Trial Court is set-aside.

¶30

It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶33

Shubham

Rajesh Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Sahu 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

Rajkumar @ Pappu Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohd. Shahim Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khemraj Gond @ Khemraj Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Nasir Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gagandeep @ Gagan Arora Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manoj Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh