Ramayan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

This appeal is filed second time under Section 14-A (2) of the SCST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant as he is arrested in connection with crime number 01/2026 registered at police station Reserve Centre AJAAK Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections (296), 351 (2), 3(5) of BNS

¶17

2

¶18

and under Sections 3(ii)(v), 3 (1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

¶19

The appeal which was filed for the first time was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same after three months, vide order of this Court dated 13.02.2026 passed in CRA No.289/2026.

¶20

By order dated 19.03.2025 passed by the Trial Court, the second bail application filed by the appellant has also been rejected by learned Special Judge SC & ST (P.A.) Act, District Janjgir Champa against which the appellant has filed this appeal.

¶21

As per the prosecution story, on 05.01.2026, when the victim went to the Court for recording her objection to the grant of bail to Sanjay Yadav, brother of the appellant, the appellant and his father, the co-accused, approached her outside the Court and threatened her to withdraw the case filed against Sanjay Yadav. Upon her refusal, the appellant and the co-accused abused her and her parents in filthy language and by referring to their caste. On the basis of the above, an offence has been registered against the appellant.

¶22

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that there is nothing to suggest that the offence was committed by the appellant only on the ground that the victim belongs to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe. He submits that the appellant is in jail since 09.01.2026 and the trial 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.

¶23

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application, contending that there is sufficient incriminating material on record against the appellant. It is submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the appellant has

¶24

3

¶25

criminal antecedent, including involvement in a murder case. Hence, at this stage, the appellant may not be granted bail.

¶26

On this point, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has already been acquitted of the offence under Section 302 IPC vide order dated 30.12.2025 in S.T. No. 266/2022 passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur.

¶27

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

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of the appellant and the fact that the appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, without 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 19.03.2026 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

Ramayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

Ramayan Yadav 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

Nandlal Gupta Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Satan Dev Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Komal Suryavanshi

Rajesh Agrawal Vs Rajesh Chhabada

Sadaram Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh